The New Federalist January 16, 1995 Pages 5-7American AlmanacDon't Entrust Your Kids to Walt Disney!by L. WolfeWalt Disney makes the cover of Time magazine in 1937 and 1954.During the recent holiday season, more than 20 million American children found the video of the Walt Disney cartoon feature Snow White under their Christmas tree. In addition, several hundreds of millions of dollars were spent on merchandising related to Snow White, which was first released in movie theaters in 1937. In the six-month span of its video release, the total gross from the Snow White marketing blitz is expected to exceed $1 billion dollars, far more than the gross national product of several countries in the developing sector.

The Snow White blitz follows the success of yet another Disney cartoon feature, The Lion King, which is now in its second run, will be seen by more American children than any other movie in history. That film, which was absent any human characters, took place in an African game preserve, ruled over by predators; typical of the oligarchical "ideals" in Disney films, the pathetic creatures are portrayed as happy to be ruled over by the carnivorous "royal" lions, who are occasionally shown finishing off a few unspecified bones.

Meanwhile, the buildup has already begun for the next Disney animated feature, Pocahontas, whose advance billing claims that it is destined to become a "classic."

Since the 1930s, more than 3 billion people worldwide have seen a Disney movie, each containing various brainwashing messages, with most seeing dozens of these films. More than 100 million people have a Disney videotape in their home, with many having a whole shelf full. Several hundred million people have paid admission to one of Disney's theme parks. Disney-related toys are among the most popular in America.

As of 1993, Disney was the 24th most valuable American corporation, an enormous conglomerate including four movie companies, a distribution company, a cable television channel, a record company, a book company, a chain of hotels, a National Hockey League franchise named after a Disney movie, The Mighty Ducks, a chain of 268 retail outlets that sell only Disney-franchised products, and, of course, four theme parksDisneyland in Anaheim, California, Walt Disney World, outside Orlando, Florida, Tokyo Disneyland and Euro Disney, outside of Paris.Reflecting Disney's global reach and penetration, The New York Times proclaimed in 1992, that Disney's Mickey Mouse logo is recognized by more youngsters in this country and around the world than the American flag.

But as powerful as the Disney machine might seem, it is only a predicate of a far larger Anglo-Venetian brainwashing operation that created and controls Hollywood and mass entertainment. It is this operation which picked Walt Disney up in the 1920s and funded his studio. For their own purposes, this Anglo-Venetian elite created the "Disney myth" of the self-made man, the embodiment of "Americanism." And once they had created this myth, once they had convinced the average American that Disney represented "wholesomeness" and "family values," they used him and his movies to help infect American culture with some of the most evil ideas of the century.Disney Is CreatedWalter Elias Disney was born into a humble working class family in America's Midwest at the turn of the century. Nothing in his family background suggested any but the most modest of futures for the young Disney. His early years were characterized by a virulent anti-intellectualism that eschewed "book learning" and an oft-repeated preference for the company of farm animals to humans.

The first sign of Disney being picked up by the networks of his oligarchical sponsors occurs in Kansas City in the early 1920s, where he had wandered in search of a career as a "cartoonist." The city was a center of recruitment activities for the then-resurgent Ku Klux Klan. Seeking support for his cartoon and movie-making ventures, Disney associated himself with the Masonic networks which dominated the city and oversaw the Klan operations, joining the Order of De Molay, which served as a feeder organization and "youth group" for the Scottish Rite Freemasons. He was to remain a member of the masons for the rest of his life, later offering it significant funding.

But even with his Masonic connections, Disney could find little success in his movie-making in Kansas City. Within the trade, he was recognized as having little talent as an artist, though more as a "huckster." What little success he did achieve was largely the result of the work of others, most notably his partner, Ub Iwerks.

In 1923, perhaps believing that his De Molay oaths might open doors for him, Disney decided to go to Hollywood.

The Hollywood of 1923 was already a tightly controlled Anglo-Venetian colony, emerging as the capital of the American film making "industry" whose purpose was the subversion of the American republic. At the top of the heap were powerful banking interests and bankers, with direct connections to the powerful financial houses of Europe. The bankers controlled the "lifeblood" of the movie industrycapital. In that way, they effectively determined who would survive and who wouldn't, who would be forced to merge and who would be thrown on the dung heap, who would be stars, and who wouldn't and what kinds of scripts would be funded for production.

But such powerful figures, with rare exceptions, generally stayed behind the scenes. To the average American, the powers in Hollywood were the so-called moguls, such as Harry Cohn, Sam Goldwyn, Carl Laemmle, and Louis Mayer, etc., who ran the studios. Beneath them was a stable of actors, actresses, directors, and producers, and below them those who created the product that was seen in the theaters around the country. These moguls were in turn interconnected to the organized crime mob operations, especially as the latter interfaced with theater chains and film distribution.

At the level of the moguls and their bordello-like studios, internecine warfare was encouraged, in much the same way that families within the mafia might fight with each other for a larger share of the spoils. When it got out of hand, or threatened to affect the public's acceptance of Hollywood's product, the bankers made sure that a lid was put on.

Hollywood in 1923 thus resembled nothing so much as a Sodom and Gomorrah on the West Coast, whose decadence and sleazy entertainment product held the nation in rapt attention.

When Disney arrived on the scene, entrance into the Hollywood inner circle was tightly restricted. It was impossible to establish an "independent" studio without the approval of the operators of the bordello, its bankers.

Disney's membership in the de Molay lodge and some references from Kansas City were apparently sufficient to get his toe in the door.

Representatives of the most powerful bank of Hollywood, the Bank of Italy of the brothers A.P. and Atilio Giannini, saw to it that Disney was given a modest line of credit, and enough cash to get his operations going and keep them slightly above water. The critical funding relationship with the Bank of Italy, which became the Bank of America, continued for more than 30 years.The KingmakersThe Gianninis were directly connected into Venetian and Genoese banking syndicates. By the time of Disney's arrival, they were handling the funding of almost every aspect of the movie industry, including all the major studios and the personal accounts of the directors, stars, and the moguls themselves. They were also handling all the personal banking of the Mussolini family.

Clockwise from right: Opening frames from the 1928 premiere of Mickey Mouse as Steamboat Willie Disney's first animated film; posters promoting other Disney animations, Pinocchio and Fantasia; an ad for Snow White.Atilio Giannini, who handled the bank's film industry loans, was a raving and open fascist, who later became the head of the Mazzini Society and was placed under investigation as a subversive fascist sympathizer; that investigation was quashed by FBI director J. Edgar Hoover.

The bank was never investigated for its reported laundering of hundreds of millions of dollars of mob monies, including funds from the Capone syndicate and "Murder, Inc." of Meyer Lansky, et. al. Some of these laundered funds found their way back into Hollywood.

The Gianninis became the only source of short-term operating capital for the film industry and its far-flung operations. It was A.P. Giannini who personally decreed that a film in the can was to be treated as collateral, as a form of merchandise, and given the same kind of credit treatment as dry goods.

The Gianninis also helped create the "star system" and the promotion of this new aristocracy. Both A.P. and his brother insisted that the "bankability" of a film was based on proven stars; their presence in the film was an effective guarantor of the loan. If the Gianninis said that a given star had "fallen," that meant the studio had to get rid of him or her if they wanted to continue its line of credit or receive cash advances for films.

Disney was part of a "talent pool" that the Gianninis kept around Hollywood. Disney showed a knack for survival in the cut-throat competitive environment of Hollywood, mostly through the manipulation of others around him; in addition, he displayed an ability to produce a simple product, with modest appeal to the tastes of the average American.A Mouse Is BornIn 1927, Disney's first truly successful cartoon character, Oswald the Rabbit, was stolen by Carl Laemmle's Universal Studios, which handled its distribution; in addition, Universal stole much of his staff, in a move that had the approval of Laemmle's bankers, the Gianninis. Disney was being tested, before being let up another step in the ladder.

He responded with the creation of his most famous character, Mickey Mouse. Contrary to the mythology that has arisen about this birth, Mickey was in fact the artistic creation of someone elseDisney's partner Ub Iwerks. What gave the mouse its unique "character" was Disney's own simplistic worldview and personality.Unlike previous cartoon characters, even successful ones, Mickey Mouse was "human" or anthropomorphic. As the Russian film director Sergei Eisenstein was to write in the 1930s, Mickey Mouse "was at once animal and human, showing the human in the animal, and therefore, the animal in the human." This blurring of the distinction between the human and the animal was to become a consistent theme of all Disney's later output. It did not go unnoticed by Disney's financial angels, who at that time were also funding the promotion of Freudian and anti-Christian Darwinian ideologies.

The first "Mickey" cartoon was also the first "talking" cartoon. Disney had ordered that the change be made to a "talkie," immediately after the success of the Warner Brothers film The Jazz Singer in 1927. He was no doubt influenced by his banker, Atilio Giannini, who had stated that after The Jazz Singer, financing would be available only for talking pictures.Steamboat Willie, featuring Mickey Mouse, premiered to a theater stacked with Bank of Italy clients and flacks on Nov. 18, 1928. The crowd cheered the mouse, whose squeaky voice was Walt Disney himself. It was an overnight sensation, with the industry papers heralding the birth of a new star, Mickey Mouse, and hailing the "genius" of his "creator," Walt Disney.

Up until this time, Disney had dealt with his controllers through intermediaries, especially his brother and partner, Roy. But following the carefully orchestrated success of the Steamboat Willie premiere, a meeting was arranged in a Los Angeles hotel between Disney and the Giannini brothers. He showed them drawings for new Mickey cartoons and asked for a substantial infusion of cash. A.P. Giannini is reported to have personally given the okay for a major bank loan. At the same time, word was put out through Giannini-controlled networks to promote Disney and his "Mouse," with the major studios ordered to cooperate in this project.Hollywood's 'White Knight'At that time, it was common wisdom that the so-called movie industry was controlled by moguls who were mostly eastern European "Jews." However, these "Jews" had almost nothing in common with the Jewish religion, and certainly didn't follow any of its principles, especially Mosaic Law.

In fact, many of the movie executives had long since given up practicing Judaism in any form. Louis Mayer, for example, once said that he felt closer to the Catholic Church than to Judaism, although he never converted; he did not practice the Jewish faith. Harry Cohn deliberately went to work on the Jewish High Holy Days to mock religious Jews; still others among the powers in Hollywood became Christian Scientists, while Jesse Lasky became a follower of the occult spiritualist Edgar Cayce.

These "Jews who were not Jews" had extensive links to organized crime networks, especially those of "Jewish mobsters" Meyer Lansky, Bugsy Siegel, etc.

They all were bound together by membership in a secular cult, the Los Angeles lodge of the B'nai B'rith, whose spiritual leader was Edgar Magnin. His grandfather had founded the I. Magnin department store chain that was one of the first major accounts of the Bank of Italy. Magnin became known as the "Rabbi to the stars."

Magnin, and his followers in the Hollywood community, saw Judaism as a racial question. He compared the B'nai B'rith and the later large temple he built to the equivalent temple of the Masonic order in Los Angeles. In his preaching, Magnin demanded the secularization of the Jewish religion, and he ran the B'nai B'rith and the temple like a business.

Magnin was closely associated with the Gianninis, developing a relationship between the Bank of Italy and the B'nai B'rith.

At the time of the Mickey premiere, Hollywood was under increasing attack from many quarters for eroding the morals of the nation. The attack never significantly threatened the control over its brainwashing product, although there were several calls for limitations on its "lewdness." Much of the attack was deliberately steered into overt anti-Semitism, thus concealing the real power, as represented by the Gianninis and New York investment banker Otto Kahn, behind Hollywood's perversity.

It was Magnin who reportedly helped convince the moguls that Hollywood needed a "white knight," a "super clean" non-Jew whose product could appeal to "family values." In surveying the scene, Walt Disney with his loveable mouse was the most likely candidate for this "central casting" role of the "White Knight of Hollywood."

The Hollywood establishment allowed the "outsider" Disney to create a studio whose product was aimed primarily at the children's market, supporting him the effort, albeit behind the scenes. At the insistence of networks directly associated with the Gianninis, the Disney project was sanctified in the 1930 Production Code, which stated that the industry must make a special effort to produce films especially appropriate for children. Behind this was the recognition that national addiction to Hollywood would be cemented at the neighborhood theater level, and given continuity from generation to generation by drawing children to the theaters. Disney was in fact directly referenced in the code as exemplary of the types of films needed for children.

At the same time, Disney himself was given the "star treatment," with newspaper and magazine articles making his name and his character household words. By no later than 1931, the mere name "Disney" associated with a cartoon or product meant its instant acceptability by American families.

The fame and box office success of the Disney cartoons did not translate into huge profits for his "independent" studio. In part, that was because of the limits on the fees that trickled down from the big-studio, mob-dominated distribution system; ultimately, Disney was to make more money from its film-related products, such as comic books and dolls, than from box office receipts. However, his continual lack of needed cash kept Disney tied to the financial lines of his controllers, and constantly in debt.

During the period from 1928 through 1934, Disney gradually expanded the length of his product, from the short cartoon, to his slightly longer Silly Symphonies, to his first short subject, the enormously successful Three Little Pigs. Having reached and extended the limits of short animated subjects, he decided to press on, to a feature-length animated film.

The decision to make Snow White was termed a gamble by some, and even "Disney's Folly" by others, but its success was all but certain from the beginning. Disney had made the decision to go ahead with the picture after a 1934 European tour where he was feted by the oligarchy. The tour featured honors from the Gianninis' and Hollywood's favorite fascist, Benito Mussolini, and a royal dinner hosted by the King and Queen of England. It was hardly likely that the oligarchical power that controlled Hollywood would have let Disney fail.

To make sure that Snow White would be completed when Disney's money began to ran out, the Gianninis dispatched Bank of America director Joseph Rosenberg to view the partially completed film. As he left the showing at the studio, Rosenberg, without emotion, announced that the film would be a success and agreed to provide all funds needed to complete the project (whose costs had expanded from $250,000 to the then-astronomical amount of $1.7 million) and give the studio an additional $1 million line of credit. Rosenberg would provide similar services for Disney throughout the 1950s, whenever the company needed money.

In fact, the buildup around "Disney's folly" served to keep interest during the long, three-year period of production of Snow White. The talk of possible failure further magnified the carefully crafted perception of the film's success after its opening on Dec. 21, 1937. In its initial run, it grossed a then-all-time record of $8 million, while its soundtrack recording of its songs became the first such record bestseller, and its individual songs became "number one" singles.How Disney BrainwashesThe production and release of Snow White marked the beginning of a new phase of the Anglo-Venetian's Disney project. Up to that point, Disney's primary use for his patrons was to serve as a "white knight" amid the perceived decadence of Hollywood; beyond that it was to establish a niche in the "family entertainment" market, especially in the children's market. With Snow White, Disney became a primary conduit for brainwashing large segments of the population.

At its 1930s release, Snow White was seen by more children than any other film in history. But unlike many movies, which are dated and could be released only once, Snow White and other Disney cartoon features contained no actors who grow old in later films, dealt with "timeless" subjects, and hence were not dated. They could be released in regular cycles (Disney chose seven years) to catch each succeeding generation of children.

Thus, the Disney films become cultural icons, whose messages are passed from generation to generation. In that way, the Disney film became an essential part of growing up in America, with each generation acknowledging that perceived fact.

Disney did not "create" the messages in his films per se, any more than the current Disney studio did for such films as The Lion King. Those messages are the product of a degenerate culture dominated by the moral outlook of the same oligarchical interests that created Disney.

As the result of a massive public relations campaign carried on in his behalf, the American public was made to perceive Disney as good; from that it followed, that what this good man produced, was also good. In this way, critical judgment about what Disney presented was suspended, in favor of the popular perception of the "goodness" or "wholesomeness" of his product. People were predisposed to like what he produced.

From this carefully constructed podium, Disney was set up to preach, using as his "method" a form of Aristotlean reductionism that became known as "Disnification." In each of his major animated films, the Disney machine presented battles in a Manichean universe between forces of "good" and "evil." Into this simple framework, not-so-subtle brainwashing messages were inserted.

The Disney machine was instrumental in helping shift America from one degraded paradigm to another, even more degraded, over the span of several decades.

Most Americans consider themselves moral people, who believe in God. At the same time, most Americans would say that Walt Disney's films, especially his classics, such as Snow White are completely compatible with their morality and their belief in God.

But nowhere in Disney films is there even any representation of God. In fact, Disney effectively banned any mention of the word God or the implication of belief in organized religion.

During the production of Snow White, for example, there was a debate about a particular scene in which, in the Grimm Brothers fairy tale from which the movie idea came, Snow White offers a prayer to God, before going to bed. It was even pointed out by his artists that most children offered the Lord's Prayer before they went to sleep. "I don't give a damn," said Disney, "no one was going to pray to God in my movie." The word "God" was excised from the script, and Snow White was allowed to offer only a general prayer.

Disney films, in general, reject the most fundamental principle of Judeo-Christian belief, that man is created in the image of his MakerImago Deiand that he is distinct from the animal, in that, unlike any beast, he has the God-given power of creative reason. Instead, Disney films portray animals with distinctly human qualities, deliberately making any distinction between the species seem arbitrary.Human creative reason is either never presented, or, if it is, it is shown as something which gets people in trouble. In its place, we are told to resolve things through "magic"; as Disney was fond of saying when his story developers ran into dead ends, where plot lines could not be resolved: "Sprinkle some of that fairy dust." We are also told, as in Snow White, or Pinocchio, to avoid reason altogether and to "think" emotionally, with one's heart.

"The principle of any fine arts is to arouse a pure emotional reaction in the beholder," said Disney in a 1955 interview, rejecting the principles of the Golden Renaissance. "If I can't feel a theme, I can't make a film that anyone else will feelI am just corny enough to like to have a story hit me over the heart."The desire to avoid representations of imago dei has resulted in massive distortions of many fairy tales in the "Disney version." For example, in Hans Christian Andersen's Little Mermaid but not in the popular Disney cartoon, the crux of the mermaid's fervent desire is to acquire a human soul, which she associates with the quality of "love." However, when given the ability to walk and take the human form, she is rendered mute; she is hurt by the cruelties of a romantic love relationship and the result is tragedy. Ultimately, she returns to the sea, realizing that she can never obtain a human soul, for that God-given quality is unique to man.

Disney reduces this tale to a simple love story between a mermaid and a man, with banal characterizations and cuteness, and a sad ending, but with no discussion of the question of what makes a human different from an animal, even one that looks like a human. Where Andersen tried to help teach what makes one human, from a Christian standpoint, Disney distorts and twists the search for an answer into a sappy love story.

In general, Disney artists have had little trouble representing evil, often creating images that have terrified little children. They have had a far greater difficulty in representing the quality of good, since it is a totally God-given quality of humanity that cannot be reduced to a simple representation but must exist as a more complicated thought object; what Disney produces as "good" in his Manichean universe, comes out, as with the Little Mermaid, as a sort of saccharine, phony sweetness.Disney vs. the Fairy TaleThe moral education of a child begins as a series of questions to a parent about events in the child's universe. But the subject of such dialogue between parent and child is not the event itself, but the thought object created in the child's mind by that event.

A classic fairy tale, of the type written by Hans Christian Andersen and the Brothers Grimm, can assist in the formulation of the thought objects that lead to the formulation of questions. But the tale, in and of itself, doesn't answer those questions, and does not alone provide the child the new thought object which contains the germ of the answers to the moral dilemmas posed. Only through such dialogue with a moral adult can a child's morality and creative reasoning capacity be developed, such that he can become a productive member of adult society.

But Disney and his sponsors have no desire to morally educate children to become members of adult society. "If all the world thought and acted like children, we wouldn't have any trouble," said Disney in an interview. "The pity is that even kids have to grow up."

Disney claimed that the real key to the success of his features wasn't simply in their appeal or power over children. He claimed to have carefully chosen his subjects for their appeal to adult family members through a form of nostalgia or sentimentality for their youth.

"I am appealing to the child in each of us," he boasted, and its desire to remain "childlike," free of the responsibilities of adult society. Disney has thus helped entrap several generations in a regressive, enforced infantilism as they take their children to see or watch on video films that they saw with their parents years before.

In that way, the anti-Christian, anti-human messages of the earlier Disney films are constantly reinforced.

To accomplish this, and to make his desired points, Disney consciously butchered the fairy tales, changing the plots, adding or deleting characters, and enlarging or decreasing the roles of others. In the Grimms' Snow White, for example, the seven dwarfs are minor, nondescript characters; in his version, Disney used them as visual representations of personality types. Similarly, the pro-Royalist Disney demanded that Snow White be awakened by the Prince's kiss, wanting audiences to relate to the "romantic," pro-Nazi Duke of Windsor, whose abdication occurred while the film was in production, and whom Disney admired.

The family of the author of Pinocchio threatened suit over Disney's murder of the original story. Disney's response to this and any criticism: "After I am done, people will only remember my version." Studies have shown him to be right: most people now think that Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs is the name of the fairy tale, when it is a name Disney concocted.

Let's look at a few case studies to see the effect of Disney and his films on America over the last fifty years.Case 1: Selling Strategic BombingMost Americans have bought into the myth that Walt Disney was a great "patriot," who supported the Allied effort in World War II with anti-fascist cartoons and short training and propaganda films.

The truth is that Disney, like most of the Hollywood moguls, was a raving fascist who attended Nazi Party rallies in the 1930s, according to recently published reports. Disney's contact with proto-fascist movements began in the early 1930s, when he joined a self-proclaimed group of "Young Turks," whose principal meeting place was the Riviera Country and Polo Club. The invitation to the group, which included Disney's drinking buddy Spencer Tracy, Leslie Howard, Gary Cooper, and producer Daryl F. Zanuck, came from another Disney friend, the actor Victor McLaglen.

McLaglen, with money from the Hearst syndicate and Giannini's Bank of America, created a paramilitary group, which trained on the polo fields, known as the "Hollywood Light Horse Regiment." The group, with which Disney sympathized, held Bund-like mass rallies and marches, and proclaimed itself ready for armed insurrection against a "communist menace," which included the labor movement and the New Deal supporters of Franklin Roosevelt. The group had branches around the country, which included Ku Klux Klan members and similar ilk, all ready for armed insurrection and a possible coup against the U.S. government. A second group, co-founded by Gary Cooper, the "Hollywood Hussars," espoused identical views.

Disney supported these operations, while staying in the background. He was to continue to back proto-fascist causes until the end of his life, with both he and his brother Roy providing significant funding for the John Birch Society.

Disney's direct contact with the networks that supported Mussolini was handled through his friends at the Bank of America. His contact with the Nazis was through the Disney company lawyer, Gunther Lessing, with whom he attended Nazi Party functions in the mid- and late 1930s.Prints and Photographs Division/Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division/Library of CongressMr. A.P. Giannini, the banker who funded Disney, with his family. Giannini and other powerful bankers controlled the content and casting of Hollywood's entertainment industry.

Prints and Photographs Division/ Library of CongressProducer Louis B. Mayer Vittorio Mussolini, son of the Italian dictator, is

honored at a Hollywood party in 1935.Lessing had a history of involvement with British-backed Mazzini movements dating to his service as a lawyer for the Mexican bandit Pancho Villa. It was Lessing who arranged, through Berlin, for Disney to hire Nazi filmmaker and rumored Hitler girlfriend Leni Riefenstahl, only to be forced to withdraw the offer following the Nov. 11, 1938 "Kristallnacht" attack on Germany's Jews outraged Americans. Disney, however, refused to cancel her tour of his studio, despite protests.

After the war began, Disney became one of Hollywood's most outspoken supporters of the America First movement, a position that he never altered until after the U.S.A. declared war Dec. 8, 1941. When the army occupied his studio for defensive purposes in the immediate aftermath of Pearl Harbor, Disney screamed bloody murder, denouncing President Roosevelt.

But with the war underway, Disney's controllers had a job for him. He was given a government contract to make propaganda and training shorts, at the behest of a "friend," Nelson Rockefeller, then undersecretary of state for Latin American Affairs. Ultimately, his work was put under the direct supervision of the Committee on National Morale, headed by a Tavistock Institute-linked section which included brainwashers Kurt Lewin and Rensis Likert, as well as pollster Hadley Cantrill.

Some time in 1942, through these networks and London contacts associated with his "polo" set, Disney was put into contact with Major Alexander de Seversky, a former White Russian officer and pilot, adviser to the U.S. military, the founder of Republic Aviation on Long Island, and the designer of bomb-sights and aircraft. De Seversky was assigned the job of popularizing a new military doctrine of geopolitical utopianism: "strategic bombing." To this end, he had penned the book, Victory Through Airpower, and now recruited Disney to turn his book into a brainwashing film to sell the doctrine to the American people and their leadership.

De Seversky claimed that the development of the airplane as a weapon of war created the need for new military thinking. However, rather than seeing air power as it should be understood, as an extension of artillery bombardment, he argued that it was a "new strategic weapon," whose capabilities must be divorced from any other military service or related strategy. It was no longer necessary, he said, to contemplate long and costly military invasions of massed land- and sea-based forces. Instead, it was now possible through mass, high-altitude bombing to render an enemy militarily impotent and to destroy the will of its civilian population to fight.

De Seversky argued that it required only that America build a fleet of long-range bombing aircraft capable of carrying heavy payloads, and to concentrate that "strategic bombing capability" for attack on Germany and related targets in Europe and on the Japanese islands, to bring the war on both fronts to a rapid close, without the loss of American forces. To accomplish this effectively, de Seversky demanded that the air forces be constituted into their own separate military branch, as the British had done, and given the power to develop their own strategy.

De Seversky had opened his book with a description of a "strategic" bombing attack on the United States, resulting in the total devastation of its cities and government. While such an attack might not be possible yet in this war, he stated, it would be possible soon, and he "predicted" that in the future, planes would carry weapons of "enormous destruction" into the heart of America. The only defense, he argued, was to have an even greater air force that could "totally destroy" an enemy's capability to make war, preemptively, if necessary.

De Seversky deliberately left out discussion of the consequent monstrous civilian casualties. He seemed to imply an antiseptic and surgically precise war, which, while admitting that some civilians might be lost, would save more lives, especially American lives, than it would cost.

The arguments in the book were to be used to justify a delay of a second front in Europe, a move backed by Britain's Winston Churchill, aimed at slaughtering as many Germans, Russians, and Europeans as possible. But even more important, the psywar should be seen as preparing the way for the post-war "nuclear pre-emptive strike" against the Soviet Union as supported by the faction associated with the evil Bertrand Russell.

The full power of the Disney studio was put behind selling this strategy. What was produced was perhaps the most widely viewed pure political propaganda film of all time. When it opened in 1943, audiences were "blown away" by the power of its images, from the black blur of bombing planes striking the United States as the film opens, to what appears to be a fireball of destruction that marks its end. With the "Disney" name on the film, its audience acceptance was all but assured.

James Agee, film critic for The Nation, immediately saw the power of the film's brainwashing message, and worried whether de Seversky and Disney "know what they are talking about, for I suspect that a lot of people who see Victory Through Air Power are going to think they do. . . . I had the feeling that I was being sold something under pretty high pressure which I don't enjoy, and I am staggered by the ease with which such self-confidence, on matters of such importance, can be blared all over the nation, without being cross-questioned."

After the film's release, Cantrill and others reported poll results showing an increase in support for "strategic bombing."

Churchill, according to his own account, ordered a private screening of the film for himself and Roosevelt at the 1943 Casablanca conference, using it and the poll results caused by its showing, to "sell" the reluctant President on a major step-up of strategic bombing of Germany, and a further delay in the "second front."

Disney remained a strong advocate of de Seversky's doctrine throughout his life, and a strong supporter of the U.S. Strategic Air Command. In the late 1940s, he was an outspoken advocate of the Russell policy of use of nuclear weapons for a first strike against the Soviet Union. Later, prints of Victory Through Airpower were offered as "teaching tools" in U.S. history classes in high school, free of charge, by the Disney Studio.Case 2: Disney and EnvironmentalismSome time during a European junket in the mid-1930s, Walt Disney was given a book by Felix Salten, a Viennese pornographer from a salon kept by the Hapsburgs. The book was Bambi, the story of a deer family in the forest, in an English edition translated by Communist Party member Whittaker Chambers. Disney remarked that the book exactly reflected his thinking about the relationship between man and animals, and he stated his intention to make it into a cartoon feature in the future.

Disney had himself always subscribed to the theories of Charles Darwin and his modern co-thinkers, although it is hardly likely that he ever bothered to read Darwin. Disney used eugenic theories of race to explain his reasoning for never hiring a black, except for the position of a porter, and his acceptance of the view that some people's are "unfit" to govern themselves.

These views, and his contacts with circles in the British royal family, brought him into contact with the Huxley family. In 1939, he sought the advice of Sir Julian Huxley in the preparation of a sequence depicting the origins of life for his "concert feature," the animated film Fantasia; Huxley was brought to the studio as an adviser for the section orchestrated to Stravinsky's Rite of Spring.

At the time, there was nothing resembling a mass movement for "environmentalism" in the United States. With the release of Bambi in 1942, Disney produced what is probably the most anti-human, pro-environmentalist film of all time, in the form of a "children's feature."

In the Salten story, the tamed animals revere humans as gods, while the wild animals hate them as demons whom they call "Him." At the beginning of the book, all creatures are willing to cede man his dominion over nature. By the novel's end, this view is fully dispelled, when Bambi, taken by his dying father to view the corpse of the murdered poacher, is instructed that humans are the same as animals, that they kill and are killed and that they have no special right to dominion over nature.

When the book was first published in 1924, The New York Times hailed this anti-human ethos: "The author has given us the life story of a forest deer, and Felix Salten's comprehension of the entire universe as well. . . . Throw away your Spinozan tomes on pantheism and read Bambi."

Disney demanded that the book's central anti-human thesis be kept intact. The forest, he told his artists, is the Lord's true universe and His creation, and it was to be shown, in the most brutal way possible, that it was man's intrusion into this universe that destroys it. Against the advice of his own story people, Disney insisted that the doe, Bambi's mother, be killed by human hunters and that the killing be jerked for every tear possible from the audience. He further insisted that a fire, caused by human carelessness, destroy the forest.

In order to make the contrast between the human "beasts" and their helpless, cuddly animal "victims" more obvious, Disney insisted that all animal predators be excised from the script: "There is nobody swooping down eating somebody else and their one common enemy is Man. That's the conflict therekeep it simple."Disney demanded realism in the depiction of all the animals, but gave them anthropomorphic personalities: "I want them to be human. I want people to forget that they are watching animals."

He also inserted his own perverse Christian symbolism: Bambi is born into a scene visually akin to the manger birth of Christ, replete with animals hailing the birth of "a young prince."

The overall effect, especially on impressionable young children, was a frightening anti-human experience that had the child identifying with animals. Said critic Richard Williams in 1989, "I came out of Bambi on my hands and knees."

Bambi had become the symbol of, first, all deer, and then all animals, just as Disney intended. George Reiger, writing in Field and Stream in 1980, observed that Disney and his staff were guilty of the worst blasphemy. "In Disney's version, once Bambi is raised in status from deer to Jesus Whitetail superstar, man's hunting of deer becomes a crime comparable to the persecution of Christ." Today, environmentalists and others have commented on the effectiveness of Bambi's message, calling the revulsion against harming animals because of their alleged human qualities, "the Bambi syndrome."

But Bambi, whose box office draw has increased with each new release, was only the first salvo in Disney's brainwashing barrage on behalf of the Huxley networks. Coincidental with Juilan Huxley's founding of the international environmentalist movement with creation of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) in 1948, Disney embarked on the development of what he termed "true life" nature productions. These "live-action" films portray animals as having human emotions, even personalities, to blur all distinction between animal and human society. They further imply that animals "think" or "reason" like humans, and that they are "creative," denying the God-created distinction between man and all lower species.

Here, Disney mirrors the thinking of the evil Jeremy Bentham, the man who headed British intelligence at the end of the eighteenth century and an avowed enemy of the American Republic. Bentham claimed that animals "feel pain," much as humans do, and therefore are to be given equal "consideration" with humans.

In Bambi and some of his other animated films that feature animals, it might be argued that Disney was using the anthropomorphic representations as a metaphor, in the same way as some fairy tales do. However, it can be shown in almost every case that Disney goes beyond what is necessary for a metaphorical representation, to make a literal and emotional point about the similarity between humans and animals.

In these "true life" adventures, which are the benchmark for much of what comes later in "nature" propaganda films of the type shown on public television, Disney goes a step farther into outright lying. His method is a version of the "big lie" technique. As he explained in a later magazine article, headlined The Roving Camera, Disney tried to create the impression that what he presented was fact, by overwhelming the audience with minute detail, magnified by the big screen. Like Darwin's presentation of large amounts of observable detail as proof of his unscientific fraud, Disney indicated that all that is important in nature was what could be seen by the camera. His Aristotleanism denies unseen ideas that are the product of human creative reason, ideas which become the basis for man's comprehension of nature and the basis for his mastery of it, in the spirit of the famous commandment in the Book of Genesis.

For his first non-animated film, Disney chose a study of Alaskan fur seals which was shot by two nature photographers he had encountered on a trip to Alaska. It was shot in the remote Pribilof Islands, where fur seals migrate year after year to fight, mate, bear children and then leave, all at once. Through careful editing, Disney depicts seals with human feelings of love, anger, remorse, etc. Disney likened the movie to an "animal soap opera." The 30-minute film was promoted into a huge success by the Disney-friendly media.

The series progressed to longer feature-length movies, such as The Living Desert and The Vanishing Prairie, released in 1953 and 1954. Disney demanded extensive editing to bring out as much anthropomorphism as possible, even scripting the animal "characters" as if they were, indeed, real actors.

Disney's nature series included increasingly frequent scenes of graphic and even shocking violence and death. One critic remarked that there was more killing going on in these so-called nature films than in a dozen war movies. Disney defended this, stating that violence is what characterizes all animal behavior, including human behavior. To make it more palatable, he deliberately "prettified" the blood and gore through orchestration to musica technique today commonly used in horror and other graphically violent films.The animal "stars" were given names, and their relations with each other became totally human. In some of them, in order to make a point in the "plot," Disney's dishonesty borders on the grotesque. In The Legend of Lobo, for example, he used a seemingly "wild" animal that in fact had been trained to do certain tricks, not telling either audiences or critics about the training.

Taken as a whole, the series is a most powerful array of films devoted to the belief that animals are just like humans, while presenting human civilization as their increasingly dangerous enemy.

In a 1945 article for the Tavistock Institute thinktank-linked journal, Public Opinion, Disney had advocated the mass distribution of films through schools as the most efficient means of "educating" youth. He put this into practice with his "true-life" series, donating millions of dollars of audiovisual equipment and copies of the films to schools across the nation. By the end of the 1950s, nearly every child in America had seen at least one of these Disney films and/or Bambi, either in the theaters or in school, where specially prepared guides instructed teachers on what to say.

The "true-life" series reached an even wider audience through the Walt Disney Presents television series. Meanwhile, the studio continued to hammer away on rabid environmentalist themes in its animated features, most notably 1001 Datamations, which has been praised by animal rights activists for helping create the movement against the use of animal skins and furs.

With The Lion King, the Disney Studio has returned to the basic plot outlines of the "true-life" series, weaving them into a full-length animated feature, set in an African game park, and absent all evidence of human civilization. The film is a celebration of the law of the jungle, with the not-so-hidden message that animal society is the same as human in its brutality and violence. The film is well on its way to becoming the most widely viewed movie of all time.Case 3: Disney and the McCarthy WitchhuntOne of the most disgusting and degrading acts of the last half century was the toleration, and even support, by the majority of Americans for the McCarthy witchhunt from 1945-54. Walt Disney personally played a critical role in kicking off that operation, sponsored by British oligarchical circles and their allies on this side of the Atlantic, and in its "sale" to the American people.

De Molay lodge member Disney from the 1920s onward had been an avowed "anti-communist" and supporter of fascist "anti-communist" initiatives, especially those directed against organized labor. Through his Masonic connections, Disney made contact with FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover, and from at least the mid-1980s, Disney was volunteering information on "suspected communists" to the FBI. According to documentation published in the recent Disney biography, Marc Elliot's Walt Disney: Hollywood's Dark Prince, Disney was providing regular reports to Hoover and to his agents in the Los Angeles area.

Disney labelled a bitter 1941 union-organized strike against his studio as communist-inspired, and sought to have its leaders investigated by the FBI. The strike was in fact triggered by Disney's abusive labor policies, which had his cartoonists and other employees working on one of the lowest pay scales in the industry. Disney's refusal to give anyone but himself public credit for the creative product of the studio also contributed to the bitterness of his abused workforce.

With Hoover's knowledge, Disney had turned to the gangster Willie Bioff, who ran a studio-controlled union that was effectively a branch of Murder, Inc., to help bust the strike. The Roosevelt Justice Department, with little help from the FBI, arrested Bioff before he could mount his intervention. Ultimately, the strike was settled with the help of Disney's friend Nelson Rockefeller; Disney saw to it that most of the union leaders were either fired or forced to quit, in open defiance of labor laws then already on the books.

Disney continued to snitch to the FBI, filing reports that were most often the product of his paranoid imagination or pure fabrications directed against the former strike leaders. With the blessing of Hoover, in February 1944, Disney initiated the formation of a Hollywood "anti-communist" brain trust, the Motion Picture Alliance for the Preservation of American Ideals; the group included 75 prominent actors, directors, and producers, as well as Roy Brewer, the man who had been hand-picked by the jailed gangster Bioff to run his union, the International Association of Theatrical and Stage Employees (IASTE). With Disney as its vice president and spokesman, the first task of these anti-communist crusaders was to work against the 1944 reelection of FDR, whom they labelled "a dupe of the international communist conspiracy."

Prints and Photographs Division/Library of Congress

Senator Joe McCarthy

Erich Andres/HamburgDresden, Germany, following the

1945 firebombing

EIRNS/Stuart Lewis

Elementary school children

celebrate "Earth Day." War on Drugs / Ganni Franco PirasIt is important to note that, while there were many known and close communist sympathizers and Communist Party members in and around Hollywood at the time, the idea that they could or did control the output of American films is pure nonsense. That output was controlled by the same Anglo-Venetian controllers who created Walt Disney and the Hollywood "dream machine" he became part of. For the most part this crowd, which also effectively controlled the mobs of Meyer Lansky, Bugsy Siegel, etc. was pro-fascist. And they, while loudly organizing people to crow about the "red menace," authorized the cutting of checks that paid for the stable of red-tinged castoffs of the Frankfurt School who were employed to help in the presentation of "Americanism" on celluloid.

It was Walt Disney who personally initiated the witchhunt in Hollywood with a 1944 letter to Sen. Robert Reynolds (D-N.C.) which promised the MPA's full support the attack on the "nest of red vipers." Soon the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) had investigators all over town, handing out subpoenas.

By November 1947, HUAC, now headed by the rabidly anti-labor Congressman J. Parnell Thomas, with the full blessing of the industry, IASTE and the American Legion, launched the most ambitious investigations in its history. It was during these hearings that the committee focussed on a series of left-wing writers, who became known as the Hollywood Ten. The ten refused, under relentless pressure from Parnell, to answer the question that was to become the hallmark of this era, later named for the even more rabid, "red-hunter," the notorious Sen. Joseph McCarthy: "Are you now or have you ever been a member of the Communist Party?" The 10 stood squarely on their First Amendment rights, yet were thrown in jail for contempt.

The committee, working with Brewer and people in the industry, proposed to crush the careers of those whom they targeted by the creation of a "blacklist" that would ban anyone accused by the committee from work anywhere in the industry for all time. On Nov. 24-25, 1947, a meeting of the motion picture industry's top people, its studio bosses, its independent producers, and Brewer was called at the Waldorf-Astoria hotel in New York City to discuss the blacklist and whether they would agree to enforce it against the Hollywood Ten and all others. Disney helped draft the infamous "Waldorf Statement" which endorsed the blacklist and pledged its enforcement against the Ten and anyone else who was found to be "subversive or disloyal." He stood by this action for the rest of his life.

By May 1947, the mere receipt of a subpoena by HUAC as an "unfriendly witness," or even leaks from the FBI of investigation, were sufficient grounds to be blacklisted. There were whimpering protests from some corners, but Disney and his cronies ignored them.

The snitch Disney claimed that one of the proudest days of his life was his testimony before HUAC as a "friendly witness" on Oct. 24, 1947, in the afternoon session, where he attacked the communists who had "conspired" against his studio and defended the blacklist, presenting fabricated "evidence" against the strikers.

The "blacklist" was soon a fact of life not only in Hollywood, but in other industries across the country. Tens of thousands of innocent people and their families were denied employment and hounded by the witchhunt apparatus. The degenerate homosexual and drunkard, Sen. Joe McCarthy, thanked Disney and the others in the MPA for showing the way to rest of the country.Case 4: "One Pill Makes You Larger. . ."Walt Disney, in the years before his death in 1966, was already, as were many right wingers that he associated with, a vocal critic of the growing San Francisco-based psychedelic counterculture. However, the same Walt Disney played a crucial role in helping to create that counterculture.

As early as the Silly Symphonies of the 1930s, Disney had been experimenting with the bold use of color and loud sound that resembled nothing so much as a hallucinogenic drug-induced stream of consciousness. Much of this experimentation later found its way in to Disney's 1941 so-called concert feature, Fantasia. This was later to cause Life magazine to remark that Fantasia was the first LSD-based work of art, and that Disney was in fact the godfather of all psychedelic art.

But there is a more direct connection between Disney and what was to become the psychedelic counterculture. Since at least the 1920s, Disney had been obsessed with Lewis Carroll's cocaine-influenced "children's" story, Alice's Adventures in Wonderland. He was, he claimed, intrigued with its surrealistic imagery, its highly illogical "logic," and its plethora of bizarre characters. By 1945, after complicated negotiations, he secured the rights to the story and commissioned what was to be a six-year project to bring it to the screen.

To develop his vision, Disney turned to the one person he thought most qualified to do the job: Aldous Huxley, already well-known in the Hollywood set as the advocate of hallucinogenic drug experience and who was later to become one of the architects of the British-created LSD culture of the 1960s. He had come into contact with Aldous Huxley through contact with his brother Julian, first meeting him when the latter was collaborating with Disney on Fantasia.

Disney explained to Huxley that he wanted to produce a "work of the head," something that would be beyond a children's story, that would produce a "dizzying experience."

Huxley worked on several scenes and an overall script outline for the project, but before he could finish, he became a victim of Disney's imperious rage. Huxley made the mistake of speaking out against the brutality used against strikers, including his son, at Warner Brothers. Disney seized the work that he had done on Alice and asked him to leave.

Disney, following the Huxley outline, demanded that the film's imagery be at once real and totally surreal, at once frightening and at the same time pleasing, and always overwhelming. The now-famous images of the Red Queen, the Cheshire Cat, the Mad Hatter and his Tea Party came out of these sessions. When the work was finally completed in 1951, he was certain that he had produced a masterpiece. Following the original scenario outline from Huxley, the film came out as almost a "free association" series of scenes, with jarring and often disjointed images. It achieved the "dizzying" effect that both Huxley and Disney had desired.

Disney had produced a movie that was ahead of its timeor more precisely, was to shape a time ahead. Later studies have shown that of all the Disney films, Alice in Wonderland, with its bright colors and surreal, free associated images, is one of the most remembered by the generation that was to become known as the "baby boomers." Many were not yet born when the film premiered and others too young to see it. But see it they did, in its many releases, or later when it became the first (and only) Disney cartoon feature to be regularly shown each year on television.In the 1960s, with the nation's campuses primed with doses of mescaline and LSD, Alice in Wonderland began to play back in another "theater." Psychiatrists interviewing the takers of these hallucinogenic drugs, asked their subjects to describe the visions in their "trips." "It was like Alice, man," many would say. "You know, like the cartoon. Like wow, you know, like shrinking. All those colors."Alice in Wonderland, seen years ago when they were children, was now flashing back in their drugged minds. As this became known, the movie, along with Fantasia, became "a thing" to see and there were new "appreciations" of their "transcendental" importance.

One of the hit songs of those days by the San Francisco rock group The Jefferson Airplane, was called White Rabbit. It described several images of a drug trip that could have been lifted directly from Disney's Alice. Asked where they got their inspiration for the song, Grace Slick, the lead singer, replied, "From Disney, man. This is Disney. You know, the Cheshire Cat, the Mad Hatter, and hey, the White Rabbit. Feed your head, man."A Cultural IconOn July 17, 1955, Disney opened the first "theme park" in history in Anaheim, California. It was as different from an amusement park as Disney's animated features were from standard cartoon fare. The concept, as Disney explained it, was to produce a "new kind of reality," something akin to what the cyberjerks today call "virtual reality," an artificially created universe, relying on fooling the senses, which would provide the basis for believable interaction. From the moment a person enters the admission gate, in fact, from the moment he or she stands in line for a ticket, Disney takes control of his experience, allowing him to make perceived choices but only from a range of controlled choices. This is what brainwashers call a "controlled environment."

In the theater, or in front of the television set, there still exists a seemingly impenetrable physical barrier between you and the action you are watching: the screen. In its place, Disney now sought to create a "three dimensional life space" that people would wander around it. By presenting carefully scripted entertainment, as he told those involved with the project, Disney could make the artificial reality now so much more compelling that people would come away having "learned" things that they had neither thought, felt, or believed before.

While Disney directed a hand-picked staff drawn from his studio on the Disneyland project, key guidance came from outside, from the Stanford Research Institute (SRI), one of the leading outposts in the United States of the Tavistock Institute of Human Relations in London, the British Royal family's psychological warfare center.

The combined effort by Disney and his brain-washer advisers produced a park divided into "fantasy" theme areas that dragged an adult back into a series of feeling states. The effect was to create a sense of nostalgia for an idealized past and a present and future based on this. The feelings were triggered by Disney-controlled images. For a child, the experiencing is totally overwhelming, making a long-lasting impact on their young minds which is reinforced by and reinforces their attachment to Disney.

Disneyland's 1955 nationally telecast opening amplified its effect on the American population.

Disney's television show in 1955 was the most widely watched program by American families; that show featured prominently the person of Walt Disney, who now was cast, Hollywood style, as America's favorite old uncle, who was the symbol of all that was "right" with America. His creation of Disneyland, "America's favorite place," the "Magic Kingdom," was the proof that this was so.

Tavistock-linked anthropologists have more recently started to describe Disneyland and Orlando, Florida's Walt Disney World as quasi-religious, twin "shrines" of American popular culture.

"It is clearly a pilgrimage site in that people go there not just for a simple vacation but to relive the myths that they group up on," says Conrad Kottak, a University of Michigan anthropologist who analyzed both the mass television culture and Walt Disney World. "You go there to relive your childhood and to see the things that passed for gods and goddesses. It is going to see a national mythology at a sacred site."

"People come here because they feel it's something that they need to do," said an executive of Walt Disney World. "There is an emotional connection to Disney at a very early age. You almost have to come here at some time."Disney's America?"I am not Disney any more," Walt Disney told an interviewer two years before his death from cancer in 1966. "I used to be Disney, but now 'Disney' is something that we have built up in the public mind over the years. It stands for something that you don't have to explain what it is to the public. They know what it is."

Disney thus described one of the effects of a four-decade Anglo-Venetian cultural warfare operation against the American population, in which he played a willing, if not always witting part. Disney, through his films and his actions, had helped to undermine the ability of Americans to reason creatively, to comprehend their nation's history and the meaning of their lives. He had "entertained" them into believing that he and his film and theme park product represented all that was "wholesome" and "good" about America, beckoning them to turn from complicated problems to sentimentalism.The Disney empire continued to trade off this mythology after its putative founder's death. However, after years of running on "autopilot," in the late 1970s and 1980s, it started to falter, producing an inferior brainwashing product, and losing money. The company became a target for takeover specialists who planned to dismantle it. At that point, London and Wall Street intervened to protect their decades of "invested" capital in the Disney psychological warfare machine. The company was saved from the corporate raiders, by, among others, Michael Milken, given a new leadership, headed by Michael Eisner, and refocussed around producing animated films according to the "classic" Disney formula, of which The Lion King is the latest in a string of box office successes.

Last year, Disney initiated efforts to construct a $650 million "American history" theme park in Virginia's Piedmont Hunt Country. Ironically, they ran into strong opposition from the environmentalist and protectionist movement which Disney's films had helped create; but in the end, Disney was delayed and forced to look for a new site only by the uncertainty of the financial markets and the company's vast debt.

In the debate on "Disney's America," as the theme park is to be called, some historians and others challenged Disney's ability to accurately portray history. However, no one ever raised a peep about the profound negative effect that Disney, for more than five decades had had on the mind of the American population. In fact, all the opponents made sure to pay homage to Walt Disney as a "creative genius" and great patriot.

And, while there was locally based opposition to the billion-dollar theme park, the majority of our citizens saw absolutely nothing wrong with it and were disappointed by the project's delay.

To this day, the myth first constructed by those who created Disney persists, the myth that, while there are problems with Hollywood in general, Disney is "wholesome" and is something to which we can entrust the minds of our children. After all, didn't your parents entrust you to Disney?

Yet, if we look at the effects of these decades of cultural warfare against the minds of our population, we can see that each succeeding generation has been more morally confused, less mentally and creatively capable than the last. Each has been more attracted to fantasy states, to emotionalism rather than reason, and to increasing levels of pessimism. Disney and his films, reappearing every seven years like locusts, have played a not insignificant role in pushing us down this slippery slope. And yet, the American population, seduced by the sentimentality and the fantasies spun by the Disney brainwashing machine, eagerly await their next dose of mental poison.

If we are to have the moral fitness to survive as a nation, then we must reject such pernicious "entertainments," as represented by Hollywood and its Disney machine in favor of our moral responsibility. We must cease to want to live in "Disney's America" and reclaim our nation for ourselves and, most of all, for our children.