Newspapers distribution of DVD on radical Islam raises sharp questions

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

Look at you mopes blurring the line between radical Islam and peace loving Muslims. You should be ashamed. Every time radical Islam is criticized you have OUTRAGE and act like all Muslims are being attacked. Radical Islam is a problem but you proles are in denial beyond belief.

An attack on radical Islam is 'terrible'? Oh the shame.

[doodlebugg 10]

Are you related to Sara Palin? The issue at hand, in case you didn't know, is that somehow this dvd full of hate for Islam was allowed to be inserted into the newspapers of the swing states. Do you think that a dvd full of hate for Judaism, Christianity, Buddism, etc. would be allowed to be inserted and distributed along with people's morning paper? I think not.

Are related to Osama Bin Laden? What does Palin have to do with the movie? Did she endorse the movie?

Have you seen the DVD? I don't think so.

Are you aware there's a movie coming out called Religulous with Bill Maher? It's supposed to be funny but some could call it a hate movie against various religions.

Hmmm. nothing about the CAIR profiles, either? Surprise, surprise.

Palin tends to skirt the main topic, as you have. Related to Osama Bin Laden? That's rich! Is the movie with Bill Maher going to be distributed freely inside people's morning paper for free? Does it target only one religion and incite hate? As a result of the movie will there be an increase in hate crimes against muslims in America?

What exactly does CAIR have to do with this video other than the fact that they are one of many many organizations that condemn the dvd? I haven't had time to look at the profiles because I'm working but I will even though that's a separate topic altogether.

I see now who the Clarion group is gearing it's propaganda towards. Sickening to say the least.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Look at you mopes blurring the line between radical Islam and peace loving Muslims. You should be ashamed. Every time radical Islam is criticized you have OUTRAGE and act like all Muslims are being attacked. Radical Islam is a problem but you proles are in denial beyond belief.

An attack on radical Islam is 'terrible'? Oh the shame.

No we don't. You just like ignoring what people actually say so that you can slander people.

Mr "Relgionofpeace.com" clearly can't see that whenever he opens his sizeable mouth, he ends up attacking far more than mask-wearing suicide bombers.

Edited October 3, 2008 by Paul Daniels

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

Look at you mopes blurring the line between radical Islam and peace loving Muslims. You should be ashamed. Every time radical Islam is criticized you have OUTRAGE and act like all Muslims are being attacked. Radical Islam is a problem but you proles are in denial beyond belief.

An attack on radical Islam is 'terrible'? Oh the shame.

Its more about looking for every oppurtunity to call someone a racist or a bigot Ive been seeing alot of it lately. Its a warm-up for a Obama loss.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Look at you mopes blurring the line between radical Islam and peace loving Muslims. You should be ashamed. Every time radical Islam is criticized you have OUTRAGE and act like all Muslims are being attacked. Radical Islam is a problem but you proles are in denial beyond belief.

An attack on radical Islam is 'terrible'? Oh the shame.

Its more about looking for every oppurtunity to call someone a racist or a bigot Ive been seeing alot of it lately. Its a warm-up for a Obama loss.

Marc - you really are priceless.

YOU have been seeing it, because YOU post threads that (surprise, surprise) include racist arguments!

What was that book Obama was reading again?

A "muslim's view" was it? Not a big, strong, red-blooded American like you. No... a "muslim's view".

You have no shame. And even less honesty.

Edited October 3, 2008 by Paul Daniels

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

I got an Idea, lets ban all movies on nazi germany due to the fact all germans are not bad.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Has anyone seen this movie to be able to comment on it authoritatively?

[alienlovechild 75]

Related to Osama Bin Laden? That's rich!

It was fair as your Palin remark unless she's in the movie because I'll bet Bin Laden is.

Is the movie with Bill Maher going to be distributed freely inside people's morning paper for free? Does it target only one religion and incite hate? As a result of the movie will there be an increase in hate crimes against muslims in America?

No, but the Maher movie is going to have a wide release unlike the evil DVD in question. Maher's movie may incite as much hate Obsession but I doubt it. What happened to all the hate crimes against Jews after The Passion of the Christ came out? I somehow doubt any movie will piss off Americans more than 9/11 did.

What exactly does CAIR have to do with this video other than the fact that they are one of many many organizations that condemn the dvd? I haven't had time to look at the profiles because I'm working but I will even though that's a separate topic altogether.

This movie is the kind of thing CAIR specializes in railing against but they aren't pure either and the OP mention them as prime opponents of the movie and you chose to go after the profiles in the movie so profiling CAIR is fair game. Still waiting on your painting Alan Dershowitz as radical right-winger response.

I see now who the Clarion group is gearing it's propaganda towards. Sickening to say the least.

I did more to help end the slaughter Muslims in Europe than you'll ever do.

Edited October 3, 2008 by alienlovechild

[Scott & Lai 12]

Has anyone seen this movie to be able to comment on it authoritatively?

Good question....perhaps doing so should come before the outrage against it. Otherwise the impression is given that those who object to it do so not based on the contents, but simply because it dares to criticise something going on within Islam.

[Jenn! 918]

Has anyone seen this movie to be able to comment on it authoritatively?

Good question....perhaps doing so should come before the outrage against it. Otherwise the impression is given that those who object to it do so not based on the contents, but simply because it dares to criticise something going on within Islam.

Likewise for those defending it without having seen it. What does that say?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

It is a bit silly

[Scott & Lai 12]

What's silly? The movie, or attacking something you've never seen?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

What's silly? The movie, or attacking something you've never seen?

I didn't say anything about the content or tone of the movie one way or the other.

[Peikko 1,575]

Newspapers distribution of DVD on radical Islam raises sharp questions

The glossy color insert greeting some readers of the St. Petersburg Times Sunday featured searing graphics: images of New York's ground zero after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, a masked fighter and a child holding a rifle.

Emblazoned across the placard's front was the name of the controversial film included with the flier: Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against the West. Touted in glowing quotes on the flier from notables such as film critic Michael Medved and Howard Gordon, executive producer of Fox TV's action series 24, the film compares the danger to America from radical Islam to the danger the world faced from Nazi Germany in the 1930s.

And the insert Times readers received Sunday was part of an effort aimed at distributing 28-million copies of the movie on DVD to Americans across the country through 70 different media outlets, including dozens of newspapers ranging from the St. Petersburg Times and every other major newspaper in Florida to the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal.

"I got almost all the way through it, and I turned it off," said John Brough, 70, a retired businessman in New Port Richey who feared the film might encourage Americans to react harshly to all Muslims, despite the fact that it begins and ends with a disclaimer noting most Muslims are peaceful and do not support terror.

"When I first read it, I was angry . . . it seemed (designed) to get people up in arms," said Brough, who was among just 13 people who had complained about the insert to the Times by Monday afternoon (the newspaper said eight more people called to complain they hadn't received a copy). "I found it offensive."

Other critics wonder about the timing of the insert – placed in newspapers nationwide to coincide with the 7th anniversary of 9/11. The list of newspapers included in the distribution feature publications in Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Iowa and Colorado – all states hotly contested in this year's presidential election.

With polls indicating that Republican candidates and specifically GOP presidential nominee John McCain fare well on questions of national security and terrorism, some wonder if the nonpartisan, nonprofit group funding the inserts aren't attempting a subtly political maneuver.

"This seems to demonize a certain political candidate and benefit another," said Ibrahim Hooper, spokesman for the Council on American-Islamic Relations, based in Washington D.C. "We would call on all political candidates to repudiate this fear-mongering. It's as if someone sent (pro-Nazi film) Triumph of the Will or (pro-Ku Klux Klan film) Birth of a Nation into people's homes."

Greg Ross, a spokesman for the New York-based Clarion Fund, a nonprofit created to spread distribution of the film, has been working his cell phone for days offering answers to journalists covering the growing controversy.

Ross said: No, the film isn't designed to benefit one candidate over another (federal rules for nonprofits prohibit political stands). Yes, the film's Web site briefly featured a column praising McCain, but it has been removed and doesn't represent the group's views.

He also said this: Yes, the mailings were timed to reach the public on the anniversary of 9/11 in swing states, but only to generate headlines and build donations to Clarion. Yes, the film was once marketed and supported by pro-Israel groups, but groups connected to other religions have also supported it.

And despite the fact that controversial terrorism experts such as Steve Emerson and Daniel Pipes appear prominently in the film – some critics accuse both men of unfairly targeting Muslims – Ross insisted the movie has no political agenda beyond exposing the anti-Western and anti-Semitic actions of radical Islam.

"We're only attacking a small swath of people in a giant religion who are bent on doing harm to Americans," said Ross, who would not reveal the identities of donors who have supported their effort, saying contributors fear reprisals from terrorists.

"Whoever wins this election will have to deal with this," the spokesman added, noting that Clarion has a film assembled with a $1-million budget, The Third Jihad, ready for limited release in theaters in October. "In our movie, you see very clearly the radicals speaking for themselves. No one is putting words in their mouths."

Donnie Ali, a spokesman for the Tampa office of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, noted that area Muslims were surprised and offended that the insert arrived during the Muslim religious holiday of Ramadan. But Ali declined to criticize the distribution of the film, despite noting that up to 40 people called his office to complain about the insert.

"Running from a film like Obsession would be like pouring gasoline of the fire of Islamaphobia," he said. "People who have nothing to hide, don't hide from anything . . . And sometimes we have to define ourselves by showing the world what we are not."

I haven't seen the film so of course have to go on what is being said in this article and the views of those who have.

From what we read here, it's reasonable to suggest that the film is propoganda. Whether one is supposed to distinguish between 'peaceful' muslims and 'terrorist' muslims is fairly irrelevant if as is suggested the tenor of the film is to create a feeling of outrage against an easily identifiable muslim cultural identity (hence the comparison to how the jews were portrayed in Nazi Germany).

What is interesting, is that the muslims from the area have chosen to remain almost silent on this issue because of how any actions from them might be interpreted. That does not mean that they find this kind of propoganda acceptable, but that even a moderate response could be percieved as muslims living up to their 'agressive' label. How sad is that?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

The distribution and timing does seem a little suspect.