NYT’s Gabriel Claims Gosnell Trial ‘Been Widely Covered’ Ever Since Pro-Lifers Made It a ‘Cause Célèbre’

The New York Times‘s Trip Gabriel reported Tuesday that each side has rested its case in the trial of abortionist Kermit Gosnell, on trial for four charges of infanticide at his Philadelphia clinic. The first paragraph is revealing:

“They are known as Baby Boy A, Baby C, Baby D and Baby E, all of whom prosecutors call murdered children and the defense calls aborted fetuses — the very difference in language encapsulating why anti-abortion advocates are so passionate about drawing attention to the trial of Dr. Kermit Gosnell, which wrapped up here on Monday with summations by both sides.”

Revealingly, both Gabriel and reporter Jon Hurdle have embraced the language of the left (and the defense) in their sparse coverage of the trial, referring to “viable fetuses.”

In five weeks of testimony, jurors were told that Dr. Gosnell, 72, had performed late-term abortions by injecting a drug to stop the heart of the fetus, but that when one jerked an arm, cried or drew breath outside the womb, its spinal cord was cut with surgical scissors.

To anti-abortion leaders, the accounts have the power to break through decades of hardened positions in the abortion wars, not just because of the graphic details but because they raise the philosophical issue of why an abortion procedure performed in utero is legal, but a similar act a few minutes later, outside the womb, is considered homicide.

Gabriel didn’t shy away from the gruesome details, but vastly overstated reality when he claimed the story has “been widely covered,” as the Media Research Center has proven.

The case became a cause célèbre when anti-abortion activists complained that the mainstream news media were ignoring it for ideological reasons. It has since been widely covered, and every seat in the courtroom was taken on Monday.

Source Article from http://newsbusters.org/blogs/clay-waters/2013/05/01/nyts-bruni-claims-gosnell-trial-been-widely-covered-ever-pro-lifers-mad

WaPo Sports Columnist Rails at ‘Heterosexual Religious Zealots’

Woe unto you who haven’t joined the rhapsodic hymns to Jason Collins’ heroism and genuflected before the altar of diversity. You have incurred the wrath of Mike Wise.

The Washington Post sports columnist, who is rumored to sometimes write about sports, doesn’t like Christians or conservatives (“Bible-thumpers” to him and Charles Barkley), and he’s not shy about it. His May 1 column was a tour de force, dripping contempt for anyone not enthused that NBA player Jason Collins announced he’s gay.

Wise sneered at the “heterosexual religious zealots” who “used [Collins’] historic announcement to call homosexuality a sin and an open rebellion toward God and otherwise trumpeted their bigotry under the guise of ‘religious beliefs.’”

Although he didn’t name him, Wise was specifically referring to ESPN’s Chris Broussard, who had the temerity to answer honestly when asked about Collins. Broussard was about the only public voice of dissent amid the fawning, celebratory hype.

But liberal true believers cannot abide heresy, and any dissent was too much for Wise. Since they disagree with him, those Christians must be hypocrites. “Let’s at least be consistent: If the outrage at Collins is all about religion, where was the contempt for Shawn Kemp’s and Antonio Cromartie’s serial fathering? Really, why is an openly gay athlete evoking such fervor while a womanizing athlete is just one of the fellas?”

Because that’s how the sports media treats them. The good and decent liberals Wise pals around with aren’t outraged, so why should anyone dependent on them for information be outraged?

Wise saved the best of his fire and brimstone for near the end of the sermon. “The sexual orientation of others isn’t something to be ‘tolerated’ any more than their ethnic heritage is.” Fair enough, but should it be celebrated? Because that’s exactly what Wise the left are demanding.

“Collins being gay is about him, not anyone else,” Wise went on. “By sharing his sexual identity publicly, he’s stating who he is, not what anyone else should be.” So the glossy spread in Sports illustrated, the exclusive interview with George Stephanopoulos was a quiet, personal moment? Please. Collins is up front about the importance of being “the first.” Collins action, and all the “gee, isn’t he courageous” media fawning, is about manipulating public opinion on homosexuality.

Wise and other liberal sports media types have spilled an awful lot of ink waiting for their gay Jackie Robinson, speculating on his reception and anticipating just the kind of reaction Wise is so outraged about. Recently, Wise wrote about a gay former Redskin “Yes, Burgundy and Gold faithful, two of Lombardi’s grittiest, durable players in his one season in Washington had a dalliance. Get over it.” He’s been incensed about the lack of lesbian smooching on jumbotron kiss cams, and he’s touted a “very gay spring.”

So asserting that Collins’ announcement is just about Collins is about as true as saying Wise’s column is about Collins. It’s not. It’s about Mike Wise and the people he hates.

Source Article from http://newsbusters.org/blogs/matthew-philbin/2013/05/01/wapo-sports-columnist-rails-heterosexual-religious-zealots

WashPo, Politico Highlight ‘Easy Target’ Kelly Ayotte Over Gun Control Vote

Jeffrey Meyer's picture

The latest target for gun-control activists appears to be freshman Senator Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.). In strikingly similar articles appearing on May 1, the Washington Post hyped the “contentious political fight” over gun control, and Politico describing the “lingering controversy that continues to hover over the New Hampshire senator.”

The two articles try to portray Ayotte as at odds with the majority of Americans over the issue of expanding background checks, pushing flawed polling that show 88 percent of New Hampshire citizens supporting background checks. Neither the Post nor Politico mention that background checks already exist for the vast majority of gun purchases.

Instead, The Post’s Ed O’Keefe highlights how “Ayotte is facing new constituent anger and a coordinated effort by gun-control groups to turn her vote into a political liability.” O’Keefe and Politico’s Manu Raju both mention organizations including Mayors Against Illegal Guns as leading the charge for greater gun control. Neither O’Keefe nor Raju stopped a moment to consider why MAIG needed to be on the ground to gin up angry town hall participants if the people of the Granite State were naturally disgusted by Ayotte’s vote.

No, instead the aim was writing a narrative which has Ayotte on the defensive and at risk of falling outside the mainstream of New Hampshire voters. Raju decided to describe Ayotte as someone who is being transformed from a, “young conservative Republican woman whose star is on the rise — into a polarizing figure back home on a contentious issue.

For his part, Raju provided a more balanced article than O’Keefe, including quotes from several pro-gun advocates, whereas O’Keefe’s article is peppered with anti-gun quotes, including highlighting a lengthy editorial featured in a New Hampshire newspaper hammering Ayotte for her vote against extended background checks. 

O’Keefe described Ayotte as a “easy target for the gun-control groups” pointing out that as she travels the state, “Ayotte has been confronted by signs that read we are the 90%!.” Other than the brief quote from NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam, The Post ignored any pro-gun arguments in favor of the gun-control groups, who dominate the article. 

O’Keefe and Raju did their part to push the narrative that Ayotte’s vote against expanded background checks has “infuriated many residents” and use the example of Erica Lafferty, whose mother was the principal at Sandy Hook Elementary, walking out of a town hall meeting with Ayotte, as evidence of such anger towards her.    

Both articles concluded  the same way they began, chastising Ayotte for her support of Second Amendment rights.

It’s all too clear what’s happening here. Ayotte is a Tea Party conservative/libertarian in the Northeast. The liberal media desperately fears the continued electoral success of such a politician sticking to her convictions, especially in a region of the country, the Northeast, where those views allegedly are a death sentence for Republican politicians.

Source Article from http://newsbusters.org/blogs/jeffrey-meyer/2013/05/01/washpo-politico-highlight-easy-target-kelly-ayotte-over-gun-control-v

Israeli air strike kills Palestinian in Gaza

Al Jazeera – An Israeli air strike has killed a Palestinian man and wounded another in the Gaza Strip, medics said, in what appeared to be the first such attack since a ceasefire ended an eight-day war last November. Israel confirmed Tuesday’s attack, saying it targeted a fighter involved in a rocket attack on its Red Sea resort of Eilat on April 17. “A man in his 20s was martyred and another injured in an Israeli air strike in Shati refugee camp in western Gaza City,” Ashraf al-Qudra, Gaza health ministry spokesman, said. Read Article

Source Article from http://openyoureyesnews.com/2013/05/02/israeli-air-strike-kills-palestinian-in-gaza/

Anti-Muslim violence hits central Myanmar

Aljazeera – At least one person has died and 10 people have been injured in central Myanmar after Buddhist gangs set fire to hundreds of homes and overrun two mosques. Tuesday’s flare-up in Okkan, 110km north of Yangon, is the latest anti-Muslim violence to shake the Southeast Asian nation since late March. In Chauk Tal, an outlying village, leaping flames still rose on Tuesday night from the remains of several fiercely burning structures, while distressed villagers cried and hurled buckets of water to try and douse the flames. Residents said as many as 400 Buddhists armed with bricks and sticks rampaged throough the area. Read Article

Source Article from http://openyoureyesnews.com/2013/05/02/anti-muslim-violence-hits-central-myanmar/

Bangladesh factory death toll could reach 1,400: Primark says it will compensate families of killed and injured

Daily Mail – The death toll from the factory building collapse in Bangladesh could reach as much as 1,400, it emerged today. As many as 900 workers are still missing six days after the reinforced concrete of Rana Plaza in Savar, near Dhaka, crumbled around them. Around 3,000 workers – mainly young women who made cheap clothes for the likes of Primark and Matalan – had gone to work in the eight-storey building last Wednesday morning, despite huge cracks appearing in the walls the day before. The official death toll is at least 386, but that number is expected to be upgraded sharply as authorities take into account those who they believe remain trapped, dead beneath the rubble. Read Article

Source Article from http://openyoureyesnews.com/2013/05/02/bangladesh-factory-death-toll-could-reach-1400-primark-says-it-will-compensate-families-of-killed-and-injured/

Gunmakers aim for greener pastures as states pass new firearms laws

Fox – Arms manufacturers in at least two states with strict new gun laws are making good on their promise to move their operations — along with thousands of jobs and millions in tax revenues — to locales they deem friendlier to the industry. In Connecticut, where venerable gunmakers like Colt and Sturm, Ruger & Co. have been joined in the last decade or so by upstarts like Stag Arms and PTR, reform of gun laws in the wake of the Sandy Hook school shootings has left the industry feeling unwelcome. Bristol-based high-end rifle manufacturer PTR Industries announced this month via Facebook that it would be taking its 40 jobs and $50,000 weekly payroll to an unspecified new state, widely believed to be Texas. Read Article

Source Article from http://openyoureyesnews.com/2013/05/02/gunmakers-aim-for-greener-pastures-as-states-pass-new-firearms-laws/

Africa – Report pins police on ‘walk-to-work’ deaths

Observer – A new report by the international rights body — Human Rights Watch (HRW), has criticized government for turning a blind eye to the killings of at least nine people by security forces during the 2011 ‘walk-to-work’ demonstrations. The report, released on Friday, accused the police of failing to investigate the killings and bring culprits to book. Police is also accused of being one of the perpetrators of the lethal force used in breaking up demonstrations in which lives and property were lost. Read Article

Source Article from http://openyoureyesnews.com/2013/05/02/report-pins-police-on-walk-to-work-deaths/

All Wars are Fought for Usury

 

May 1, 2013

img_nathan_mayer_rothschild_quote_fullscreen.jpgThis is what Nathaniel Rothschild (1777-1836) really meant:
“He who owns the money supply owns the people.”

The human race has been enslaved by bogus debt to sociopathic bankers, who now use bogus terrorism as pretext to enforce their tyranny. 
A Rockefeller admitted that terror is a hoax. (3.21 min)

Using Gentile fronts, Illuminati Jewish bankers succeeded in privatizing the money supply and making it a liability of the State (“the national debt.”)  Money is just a medium of exchange, like a coupon.  It has no intrinsic value but is necessary for economic vitality. The bankers control the corporations that control the politicians and mass media, and ensured humanity is diverted and depleted by constant bogus wars and depressions while their world government apparatus is erected.

Here, Jyri Lina traces the origins of the Bank of England and its consequences:  “All great wars have been started and
financed by the economic conglomerate emanating from one single banking
family–the Rothschilds.”

by Jyri Lina
“The Fight Against Usury”
(Excerpt from The Barnes Review, Oct 2004)

In November of 1688 (under the sign of the scorpion) the Catholic king of England James II (Stuart) was overthrown through a well-organized invasion financed by the moneyed Jews of Amsterdam and led by the Prieure de Sion and the Orange Order.

The king was exiled to France and in February of 1689 William of Orange, the prince of Nassau, was put upon the English throne. This became known as the “Glorious Revolution.” Even official historians admit that the people did not participate in this coup.

England was in poor condition after 50 years of war with France and the Netherlands. William III asked several powerful bankers for help. They provided the English state with a loan of 1.25 million pounds but only delivered 750,000 pounds. The terms of the loan were as follows; the names of the lenders were not to be revealed, and these were guaranteed the right to found the Bank of England, whose directors were able to issue loans to a value of 10 pounds for each pound of deposited gold in the bank vault. They also were allowed to consolidate the national debt and secure payment for annuity and interest through direct Taxation of the people.

The privately owned Bank of England was established in 1694 with absolute control over the currency (the right to issue bank notes). The lending of money on usury continued at an even larger scale. Thus the English people suffered a huge national debt. Taxes had to be raised and prices doubled. To the Masonic bankers it was necessary to have a monopoly on money issuing. That way they were able to make enormous profits and also control political processes.

The Bank of England was allowed to lend money to an amount 10 times the security the lender put. up. With 5 percent interest it only took two years for the bank to earn back an amount equal to the original security.
 
By the year 1698, the national debt had risen from one and a quarter million pounds to 16 million. In 1815 it was 885 million pounds and in 1945 it had grown to 22.5 billion pounds. By 1995 the national debt had risen to more than 300 billion pounds, equal to 45 percent of GNP.

Not even the Macmillan Committee, which was appointed in 1929, managed to find out who governed the Bank of England. Only one name has leaked out–that of Rothschild. All great wars have been started and financed by the economic conglomerate emanating from one single banking family–the Rothschilds.

SPREAD OF CENTRAL BANKS

In the Netherlands, secret societies had been able to found a central bank as early as 1609. About 40 of the world’s most important central banks were established in a similar way as that of the Bank of England. In that way the Masonic bankers ruled the long-term development in the world with loan interest as a method, the central banks as middlemen, the politicians as dummies and the people as ignorant wage slaves.

The Freemason-controlled banks thus can govern political life by acting without being seen. The English people strengthened the power of these invisible Freemasons through paying taxes during three centuries. Central banks were supposed to keep the economy stable. In reality it works quite differently.

Benjamin Franklin wrote of the British colonies in North America in the 1750s: “Nowhere on Earth does one find a happier and more well-being people.” He explained that this was due to that “we in the colonies make our own currency,” called “colonial scrip.” He further explained: “By issuing our own currency we can control its buying power, and we are not obliged to pay interest to anyone.”

In these British colonies in New England, there was a wealth contrasting sharply to the poverty and misery in England. There was enough money, and it was definitely interest free.

When the Masonic bankers in England heard Franklin’s speech to the British Parliament, they made sure that Parliament forbade the colonies from using their own financial system. The money supply was reduced in half, and the colonies were forced to borrow money from the Bank of England. The result was steep interest and price increases. Within a year the streets were full of unemployed people.

In American schoolbooks, the reason given for the outbreak of the Revolutionary War was the tea tax. but according to Franklin “the colonies would gladly have borne the little tax” (of 2 percent) on tea and other matters had it not been that England took away their money which created unemployment and dissatisfaction.” The result of the influence of the English banks on the British Parliament was horrendous poverty in America. When this situation had been created, it was easy to get people ready for war which the Freemasons did with satisfaction. They wanted a safe base for their future global activities.

Among the men who drew up the Constitution of 1787, many urged protection against the financial drain of the international bankers. Therefore Article 1, Sec. 8 of the Constitution reads: “Congress shall have power … to coin money, regulate the value thereof…”

Alexander Hamilton, a Freemason and secretary of finance in the government of George Washington, and also the agent of the international financiers, ordered the establishment of a privately owned union bank and the introduction of interest money. His argument was simple; “A limited national debt would he a blessing to a nation ” He considered it dangerous for the government to issue its own currency.

Thus the United States got its first central bank in 1791. It was privately owned but had a contract running for only 20 years. It was not renewed when it expired. Andrew Jackson referred to the fact that the Constitution had given Congress the right to issue currency in sufficient quantity but not transfer this right to others.

WAR OF 1812

The historian Richard Boesen disclosed that, the Freemason Nathan Rothschild (1777-1836), who in 1806 had founded his bank in London and who partly financed the Napoleonic wars through the Bank of England, subsequently issued an ultimatum–either the contract be renewed or there would be war. Jackson called the Masonic bankers a hunch of thieves and promised to exterminate them, Rothschild gave his own orders: “Teach those insolent Americans a lesson. Force them back to a colonial status.”

The British government began to limit, the American sea trade and checked the American expansion in Canada. President James Madison in 1812 had no other choice but to let Congress declare war on England. The intention of the leader of the Freemasons, Rothschild, was to lay waste the country to such an extent that the Americans would be forced to seek financial aid. Great Britain, however, failed to regain the lost colonies, and the United States failed to occupy Canada. The war was actually fought in 1814.

Many lives were lost, but Rothschild did not triumph this time. The renewed central bank contract was again suspended in 1836 during Andrew Jackson’s presidency (1829-1837), despite the fact that he was grand master of Tennessee. The central bank was temporarily abolished.

Even so European bankers and their American agents managed to exercise an extensive control of the American monetary system. Gustavus Myers admits in his book History of the Great American Fortunes (1910): “Under the surface, the Rothschilds had a direct influence by dictating the American financial laws. The legal records show that they were the ones in control of the old Bank of the United Slates.”

In American history books there is nothing about the role of the banks in the first and second American wars of independence (that is 1775-83 and 1812-1814).

————————–
 See also “Our Chains are Forged by Usury”

Power for patriots


Comments for “All Wars are Fought for Usury “

JG said (May 1, 2013):

What great Americans we once had. Would the people of the United States today go to war to preserve their Constitutional Rights and sovereignty against the very people that are printing their money for them? Not a chance!


Henry Makow received his Ph.D. in English Literature from the University of Toronto in 1982. He welcomes your comments at

Source Article from http://henrymakow.com/2013/05/all-wars-are-fought-for-usury.html

Don Cheadle, ‘Iron Man 3’ Star: The Iron Man Suit Is ‘A Torture Chamber’

Don Cheadle doesn’t mince words when it comes to his feelings on wearing the actual Iron Man suit. Or, in his case, the Iron Patriot suit — a rebranded, star-spangled version of the War Machine suit from “Iron Man 2.” At least, I don’t think I’m misinterpreting his disdain when he compares it to a device that the infamous Spanish friar Tomás de Torquemada — known for his proficiency in the art of torture — might have created.

Regardless of that, Cheadle is once again playing Col. James “Rhodey” Rhodes — a role that he first played in “Iron Man 2,” taking over for Terrence Howard — in this weekend’s instant blockbuster, “Iron Man 3.” In this sequel, Cheadle has quite a bit more to do as the U.S. government’s version of Iron Man (a.k.a. Iron Patriot) than in the previous film — and, to Cheadle’s pleasure, a lot of that is done without the suit.

Cheadle discusses what new director Shane Black brings to the film, as well as, inevitably, his hatred for that suit. He also discusses the ups and downs of being an actor in Hollywood through the last 25 years and why he is over being asked to pose for a cell phone camera picture.

In “Iron Man 2,” you took over the role of James Rhodes from Terrence Howard. In this one, did it feel more like your role? You seemed more comfortable in it, from an outsider’s perspective.
I don’t know, I mean, you’re the audience — so I guess what you think about it matters more than what I feel about it. I know that I had more to do in this one. So I don’t know if that translates into comfort, but I had more to do.

I don’t know what the process is for taking over a character from another actor, but it just felt like this is your character now. Does that make sense?
Yeah. I mean, I didn’t feel any compunction about doing it the first time. Any questions I had about it were for me and my personal relationship that I have with Terrence. It wasn’t about any sort of a performance question in the movie, really.

You mentioned having more to do. There’s a pretty long stretch where Rhodey and Tony are without their suits, which, in a movie like this, had to be nice.
Yeah. That was, to me, one of the most fun parts about it. I got to kind of be in the action just as the physical human being [laughs], not CGI. It was doing a lot of wire work and work with the stunt team — all of that stuff was a lot of fun for me.

Obviously this is a big, summer Marvel movie, but there was something that felt small about this movie at times.
How do you mean? Intimate?

That’s a better word.
Yeah, I guess I can see that, sure. I think that when you have Shane Black being the person who is helming it, and Drew Pearce, you have a script with those guys, it’s going to be more character driven than the other ones are.

On set, how do you notice the differences that Shane Black brings?
It was more in the designing at the outset with the script than it was anything I felt necessarily during the shooting. A lot of times when we show up to these movies, it’s sort of like we’re just hanging on for dear life because it’s such a big undertaking. And there are so many technical things that have to be achieved, so Shane was smart in — not leaning on — but he definitely talked a lot with Jon [Favreau], and Jon kind of gave him a heads-up about where a lot of the bodies were and the things that he needed to be cognitive of. And then we just went about doing what what we always do: trying to figure out the best way to tell the story.

Did you feel less “hanging on for dear life” this time?
No, I think you always feel that. A lot of time we’re 300 degrees of green screen and it’s super technical. The acting, you have to obviously fulfill that. But you really have to rely on the effects team and people that are not participating at that moment and they’re going to do all of their work later. So you don’t know where you’re at half the time. You really have to rely on other people to let you know that you’re in the pocket, so to speak.

Jon Favreau has mentioned that “Iron Man 2” was a challenge, trying to cram all the Avengers storyline in, too. “Iron Man 3” has a lot of characters, but it feels smoother because everyone is related somehow. Is this something that you notice, or does it not work that way when you’re actually in the movie?
I have a different focus and a different thing that I’m trying to make sure is happening. But, yeah, I can see where people’s experience of this would be that it was — you know, you used the word “intimate” earlier. I can understand what that is.

You mentioned earlier you had more to do in this movie. About halfway though, Rhodey plays a huge part. I’ve always loved this character and this was finally the Jim Rhodes I wanted to see in a movie.
Yeah … me, too.

Do you actually get to wear the suit?
You say it like it’s a gift [laughs]. No, I have to wear it. At some point, I have to put that suit on. I mean, a lot of it is motion capture, and there are other ways that they pull it off. But at some point, you have to practically put the suit on and it ain’t no lightweight thing.

Is it plastic?
It’s very heavy. It’s fiberglass, I think that’s what it is. But it feels like it’s some special alloy that they made in a torture chamber that Torquemada created. I don’t know what it is.

I once saw you approached in public and I couldn’t help but wonder what movie that person brought up, because you’re in so many different things. What do people ask you about?
It depends on the person. Do you know what I mean? A lot of times now, with all of the cell phones, everybody just wants to get a picture of you like it’s a [laughs], like they’re hunting. They just want to put you in their trophy case sometimes.

How do you handle that situation? The line between being perceived as rude but not wanting to be in a trophy case — which is rude on their part?
It depends on the situation. If I’m with my family, people want to come up in the middle of a conversation sometimes and I go, “You know, look, I’m talking to somebody. It would be rude of me to do to you.” Just because I’m in something that you’ve seen doesn’t mean that that’s all good and it’s cool behavior. So it depends on how I’m approached. If I’m approached in a way that’s respectful and it’s something that makes sense, I don’t have a problem. But I’m really kind of over the photos thing.

When you first started out, you did a lot of guest roles on television. Is doing a guest spot on a show like “Night Court” a good experience?
That was super early in my career and it’s … I had a job. So I enjoyed it. I’m really thankful for all of those early roles that I got to play and all of those guest spots I got to be on. Shows like “Night Court” and “Hill Street Blues” and “L.A. Law,” all of that stuff, it helped me cut my teeth in my career.

Was “Boogie Nights” what you feel put you over the top? In that you noticed a difference in how things were going.
I’ll tell you that “over the top” is not a state of being in my mind. Or most actors’, I think. I don’t know that there’s a there there that exists for most actors in their mind. It’s always a grind, you know?

Perhaps “Did your phone ring more often?” would have been a better way to word that.
I think it is always that kind of a situation where, you know, the phone rings … and then it doesn’t. And then you hustle and there’s a moment of heat and it seems like you got a lot of choices … and then you don’t. It’s often feast or famine for us in this business.

Mike Ryan is senior writer for Huffington Post Entertainment. You can contact him directly on Twitter.

Loading Slideshow...
  • “Iron Man 3” (May 3)

    Tony Stark is back in “Iron Man 3,” which picks up after the events of last summer’s “Marvel’s The Avengers.” Robert Downey Jr., Gwyneth Paltrow, Ben Kingsley, Rebecca Hall, Jon Favreau, Guy Pearce and Don Cheadle all star. Shane Black replaces Favreau behind the camera as director.

  • “The Great Gatsby” (May 10)

    F. Scott Fitzgerald’s classic novel gets the Baz Luhrmann treatment: 3-D and a soundtrack by Jay-Z. (Go all-in, however, on Joel Edgerton’s mustache.)

  • “Peeples” (May 10)

    Craig Robinson and Kerry Washington star in the comedy “Peeples,” produced and presented by Tyler Perry. (Tina Gordon Chism wrote and directed the film.)

  • “Star Trek Into Darkness” (May 17)

    Chris Pine, Zoe Saldana, Zachary Quinto, Simon Pegg, Anton Yelchin, John Cho and director J.J. Abrams all return for “Star Trek Into Darkness,” the highly anticipated sequel to 2009’s “Star Trek.” Boldly go, especially with newcomers Alice Eve (as a potential love interest for Kirk) and Benedict Cumberbatch (as a terribly evil villain).

  • “Frances Ha” (May 17)

    Co-written by Noah Baumbach and star Greta Gerwig, “Frances Ha” focuses on Frances (Gerwig), a young woman navigating life and love in New York. “This is a celebration for me,” <a href=”http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/01/frances-ha-new-york-film-festival_n_1928478.html” target=”_blank”>Baumbach said at the New York Film Festival last year</a>. “One idea for the movie was that we could make it like a great pop song, so that as soon as it’s over, you want to play it again.” Just as an FYI: You will.

  • “Epic” (May 24)

    From “Ice Age” director Chris Wedge comes an action-adventure about good and evil and all that stuff. What you’ll want to note is the bananas vocal cast: Beyonce, Pitbull, Steven Tyler, Josh Hutcherson, Amanda Seyfried, Aziz Ansari, Christoph Waltz, Chris O’Dowd and Jason Sudeikis.

  • “The Hangover Part III” (May 24)

    It all ends. Bradley Cooper, Ed Helms, Zach Galifianakis, Justin Bartha, Heather Graham, Ken Jeong, John Goodman and Melissa McCarthy star.

  • “Fast & Furious 6” (May 24)

    The movie that will make you believe a car can drive through the cockpit of an exploding plane.

  • “Before Midnight” (May 24)

    The third film in Richard Linklater’s “Before” franchise (following “Before Sunrise” and “Before Sunset”), “Before Midnight” is one of 2013’s best movies thus far. Ethan Hawke and Julie Delpy reprise their roles, respectively, as Jesse and Celine.

  • “Now You See Me” (May 31)

    Magic bank robbers! No, really: “Now You See Me” is about magicians who rob banks. The cast is impressive here: Jesse Eisenberg, Mark Ruffalo, Morgan Freeman, Michael Caine, Isla Fisher, Melanie Laurent, Woody Harrelson and Dave Franco.

  • “After Earth” (May 31)

    Will and Jaden Smith star in this post-apocalyptic thriller from M. Night Shyamalan.

  • “The East” (May 31)

    Alexander Skarsgard, Ellen Page and Brit Marling star in this “Fight Club”-y thriller about environmental terrorists and the law enforcement agent (Marling) who infiltrates their ranks.

  • “The Kings Of Summer” (May 31)

    Formerly called “Toy’s House,” “The Kings Of Summer” focuses on three friends who build a house in the woods after running away from home. Think “Stand by Me,” “The Goonies” and “The Tree of Life,” but with Ron Swanson as co-star. (Nick Offerman plays one of the boys’ dads.) This excellent indie debuted at Sundance.

  • “The Internship” (June 7)

    Vince Vaughn and Owen Wilson reunite for the first time since 2005’s “Wedding Crashers” for “The Internship,” a comedy about two middle-aged guys taking internships at Google. Is it OK to say that this looks really funny? Cool, thanks.

  • “The Purge” (June 7)

    One week after “Before Midnight,” Ethan Hawke also stars in the horror thriller “The Purge,” a film about home invasions on steroids.

  • “Much Ado About Nothing” (June 7)

    Joss Whedon takes on Shakespeare in this modern-day adaptation of “Much Ado About Nothing.” A charming diversion with no superheros in sight.

  • “Man Of Steel” (June 14)

    You’ll believe a man can fly. Henry Cavill, Amy Adams, Michael Shannon, Kevin Costner, Diane Lane and Russell Crowe star.

  • “This Is The End” (June 14)

    Seth Rogen, James Franco, Danny McBride, Jonah Hill, Craig Robinson, Jay Baruchel, Michael Cera, Emma Watson and dozens of other stars play themselves (“themselves”) in Rogen’s directorial debut, an all-out, R-rated apocalypse comedy. (Rogen co-wrote and co-directed with Evan Goldberg, his “Superbad” collaborator.) “This Is The End” has the most lol-worthy trailer of the year. (NSFW, of course.)

  • “The Bling Ring” (June 14)

    Sofia Coppola’s take on the notorious Burglar Bunch, a group of Los Angeles teens who robbed from stars like Paris Hilton. Emma Watson and this movie for all the wins.

  • “Twenty Feet From Stardom” (June 14)

    This Sundance hit focuses on famed back-up singers like Darlene Love.

  • “Monsters University” (June 21)

    Mike and Sully are back in this prequel to “Monsters, Inc.” Expect bank.

  • “World War Z” (June 21)

    Originally set for release last December, “World War Z” finally arrives in theaters this June. Will the Brad Pitt film overcome a troubled production (including last-minute rewrites and reported fights between Pitt and director Marc Forster) and find its audience? Since zombies are so hot right now (“Zoolander” reference), don’t bet against that happening.

  • “The Heat” (June 28)

    “The Heat” was supposed to come out on April 5, but Fox was so happy with the film that the studio moved Paul Feig’s comedy into the heart of the summer. The red-band trailer, shown here, helps explain that decision. (It’s the best.) Sandra Bullock and Melissa McCarthy star.

  • “White House Down” (June 28)

    Channing Tatum (as wannabe Secret Service agent) and Jamie Foxx (as the President of the United States) team up to stop the U.S. government from crumbling from the inside. Roland Emmerich (“Independence Day”) directs. Yep, in.

  • “I’m So Excited” (June 28)

    Get excited: This is Pedro Almodovar’s first film in two years.

  • “Despicable Me 2” (July 3)

    “Despicable Me 2”; or, ka-ching, ka-ching, ka-ching. (It’s going to make a lot of money.)

  • “The Lone Ranger” (July 3)

    Disney’s $250 million gamble: will audiences want to see “The Lone Ranger” with Johnny Depp when Johnny Depp isn’t playing “The Lone Ranger”? (He’s Tonto.) Gore Verbinksi (the “Pirates” franchise) directs, so don’t be surprised if the answer is yes.

  • “Kevin Hart: Let Me Explain” (July 3)

    Sleeper hit potential: Kevin Hart’s last concert film, “Kevin Hart: Laugh At My Pain,” earned a surprise $7.7 million at the box office in 2011.

  • “The Way Way Back” (July 5)

    From Oscar-winning screenwriters Nat Faxon and Jim Rash (“The Descendants”), “The Way Way Back” looks like the type of charming indie that Fox Searchlight normally releases during the summertime. That’s probably why the studio spent $10 million to acquire the film — co-starring Steve Carell, Sam Rockwell, Maya Rudolph and more — at the Sundance Film Festival in January.

  • “Grown Ups 2” (July 12)

    Because you’ve always wanted to see a deer pee on Adam Sandler’s face.

  • “Pacific Rim” (July 12)

    Robots vs. monsters! Guillermo Del Toro directs what will be your geeky cousin’s favorite movie of 2013.

  • “Crystal Fairy” (July 12)

    Michael Cera play an American jerk searching for a mystical high in this Sundance comedy.

  • “The Conjuring” (July 19)

    This movie is so scary that the MPAA gave it an R-rating despite a lack of violence or bloodshed. Translation: Too scary.

  • “R.I.P.D.” (July 19)

    Jeff Bridges and Ryan Reynolds star in this high-concept adaptation of the graphic novel of the same name. <a href=”http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0790736/” target=”_blank”>From IMDb</a>: “A recently slain cop joins a team of undead police officers working for the Rest in Peace Department and tries to find the man who murdered him.”

  • “Red 2” (July 19)

    Since “Red” left so many unanswered questions. (Hey, Helen Mirren!)

  • “Turbo” (July 19)

    <a href=”http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1860353/?ref_=sr_1″ target=”_blank”>Fun with real log lines</a>: “A freak accident might just help an everyday garden snail achieve his biggest dream: winning the Indy 500.”

  • “Girl Most Likely” (July 19)

    Kristen Wiig, Darren Criss and Annette Bening star in this comedy-drama about a New Jersey native (Wiig) who returns home to live with her mother (Bening) after faking a suicide attempt.

  • “The Wolverine” (July 26)

    Hope it’s better than “X-Men Origins: Wolverine.”

  • “Blue Jasmine” (July 26)

    Woody Allen’s annual film stars Cate Blanchett, Bobby Cannavale, Alec Baldwin, Louis C.K. and Andrew Dice Clay.

  • “Fruitvale” (July 26)

    The Sundance Film Festival Grand Jury Prize winner for 2013 tells the story of Oscar Grant (played by Michael B. Jordan, pictured), a Bay Area resident who was shot and killed by police on New Year’s Day in 2009.

  • “2 Guns” (Aug. 2)

    Denzel Washington and Mark Wahlberg team up to star in what should be the best movie ever.

  • “300: Rise Of An Empire” (Aug. 2)

    Because you’ve always wanted to see a sequel to “300.”

  • “The Smurfs 2” (Aug. 2)

    This again.

  • “The Spectacular Now” (Aug. 2)

    Another Sundance favorite, “The Spectacular Now” is an excellent coming-of-age drama that recalls “Say Anything.” Shailene Woodley and Miles Teller lead the film, and will become superstars after this release.

  • “Percy Jackson: Sea Of Monsters” (Aug. 7)

    Surprise! This actually looks pretty fun.

  • “Elysium” (Aug. 9)

    Matt Damon and Jodie Foster star in Neill Blomkamp’s first film since 2009’s “District 9.” Get excited now.

  • “Planes” (Aug. 9)

    Featuring the voices of Dane Cook and Val Kilmer.

  • “We’re The Millers” (Aug. 9)

    Jennifer Aniston, Jason Sudeikis and Ed Helms star in this comedy about a pot dealer who uses a family to transport his drug supply into the United States from Mexico.

  • “In A World” (Aug. 9)

    Lake Bell won the Waldo Salt screenwriting award at Sundance this year for “In A World,” a comedy about a vocal coach with dreams of becoming a voice-over artist.

  • “Kick-Ass 2” (Aug. 16)

    Chloe Moretz, Aaron Taylor-Johnson and Jim Carrey star in this sequel to “Kick-Ass.”

  • “Ain’t Them Bodies Saints” (Aug. 16)

    Rooney Mara and Casey Affleck star in “Ain’t Them Bodies Saints,” another film that made waves at this year’s Sundance Film Festival.

Source Article from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/01/don-cheadle-iron-man-3_n_3189590.html