The Hollywood media machine has widely tried to destroy the new Brian Singer film Valkyrie, starring Tom Cruise, and they have done it with good cause.
The film portrays, with great historic detail, the 1944 plot to assassinate Adolf Hitler by a German army faction of officers concerned with the welfare of the German people.
It shows an atypical hero in it's lead role - a German Catholic Vermacht officer from a noble family, Colonel Claus von Stauffenberg, who places the welfare of the German people over his personal goals and safety.
It shows the conflict between the German military and the NeoCon like staff of the spaced out Adolf Hitler (superbly played by David Bamber) in charge of the S.S.
It shows the dynamics of a Coup d'etat in action, where the critical factor is the battle for the hearts and minds of the people, forced to choose sides under duress.
And perhaps most dangerously for the success of the film, it shows that the Second World War involved many interesting and unique stories that don't revolve around the death of some Jews that is aggrandized as the "Holocaust".
The Hollywood media machine can not have a quality film with a great story line, great acting, and a moral patriotic message taking viewers and ink from the steady stream of holocaust fiction that we all know and loathe. It might cut into the bottom line, and even more threatening, it might raise the expectations of the viewers.
I went to the film expecting the worst performance in movie history by Tom Cruise from the reviews I had read and I was very disappointed - in the reviewers.
Tom Cruise gives a wonderful performance as the war wounded and half blind Colonel Claus von Stauffenberg. Cruise obviously involved himself in this character and felt the sense of duty and sacrifice that was von Stauffenberg.
There is but the briefest mention of the Jews in this film, right in the beginning and it seems as if it may have been added in a late edit as a concession to the near Jewish monopoly that is Hollywood. Perhaps there is some obscure clause in the screen actors guild contract that states there can not be a movie about W.W.II without using the word "Jew" at least once. That's how obligatory the scene feels.
This is a movie that I would see again. And it is a movie that I will acquire for my personal collection to later use as a teaching tool.
Go see Valkyrie in the theater. Movie like this need to be supported. I promise that you will not regret it, and more importantly, you will learn something.
Submitted by Claymoremind on Mon, 2009-02-09 09:01
- Claymoremind's blog
- Login or register to post comments
- 196 reads
-
Oh really?
I stayed away from the movie because I didn't want to see the usual victims-are-always-the-jews ad nauseum, as I thought this movie would heavily portray.
Good info then.
Btw, I sent this video around to friends.
It was a HOOT!
Thanks Claymoremind, I went to see this film because of your recommendation. It is not yet another film against the Nazis, not another Holohoax film. It is about a page of Nazi Germany's history, about an attempt to get rid of the Nazi Party and save Germany from the horrendous consequences of total capitulation (2 million unwanted births from rapes, 9 million German deaths between POWs and civilians, a genocide we are not allowed to hear about).
The most interesting thing about this film is that one can learn more about Nazi Germany's makeup. For instance, Friedrich Fromm was the name of the (reluctant conspirator) Commander in Chief of the Replacement Army (Ersatzheer). Fromm? This is a german jewish name (in German: fromm=pius, religious), so what was a Fromm doing in the Nazi establishment?
But wait a minute, there was also a Rosenberg Nazi chief; nazi-held Poland was in the hands of a Frank, Gauleiter for Poland ... What is going on? Jews in the Nazi establishment? So is it true, the Nazi Party was - to say the least - encouraged and penetrated by german jewish notables, and for which purpose? My view is, the Nazi Party was supported to create an institutional antidote against any possible communist takeover attempt in Germany. Remember the failed marxist revolutionary attempt in Munich, 1918. Marxism-Leninism was an ideology explicitly tailored to bring Tzarist Russia down, not to be exported to other countries where the jewish bankers were already in control. And this is also why Stalin replaced Lenin at the latter's death, and not Trotzky. Trotzky believed and wanted marxist-leninist revolution in every country, whilst Stalin accepted it for only one country: Russia and satellite nations.
Interesting film to make one think. About the continuous lies we are being told about Nazism, Bolshevism, WW2, the Holohoax and Israhell.
history_worm