I just read the Sept. 25 Happytown™ review of the documentary Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against the West, which was distributed via newspaper and magazine inserts across the country.
I'm not sure what the Orlando Weekly gang watched, but the documentary I saw was a compilation of actual video footage from Middle Eastern TV, news and public rallies in the original Arabic with English subtitles. How can the Weekly blame the messenger for the content culled directly from the Middle Eastern press? I found the Arabic press news clips in the DVD quite disturbing. I don't understand how what appears in the Arabic media can be described as anti-Muslim just because the same news clips show up in the documentary Obsession. Saul Alinsky would be proud of the Weekly staff for their efforts in deflecting the truth to the wrong target.
Much of the commentary on the DVD came from ex-Muslims Walid Shoebat (PLO terrorist) and Noni Darwish. Maybe it was the ex-Muslims' comments on Islam that was being labeled as anti-Muslim. Who better, though, to comment on Muslims and Islam than ex-Muslims? Makes sense to me.
Obsession was released in 2005. Somehow the mass DVD distribution program on the seventh anniversary of 9/11 is now politically motivated. The Weekly is entitled to its opinion — freedom of speech is what makes our country great. I am just stunned the Weekly staff is crying foul that the Sentinel would distribute material the Weekly finds offensive. Each of us has the freewill to watch or not watch the DVD and come to our own conclusions. I am just glad the Sentinel and thousands of other publications saw the importance of inserting the Obsession DVD in their newspapers and magazines. If it was up to the Weekly gang, who is much smarter than everybody else in the room, they would never have distributed the DVD, denying people the choice to view or not view the documentary. Frankly, I find that type of censorship equally as chilling as the Arabic media news clips shown in the DVD.
Alan Kornman, Orlando
Not ELLA time
Thank you for the timely and much-needed breakdown of both candidates' tax policy proposals `"Tax fact and fiction," Oct. 2`. However, at a time like this with an issue most voters use as a deciding factor, what would possess you to prioritize ELLA Fest on your cover instead?
Adriane Truex, via the Internet
Clean it up, mm'kay?
According to the Comments section on page six `Sept. 25`, you "reserve the right to edit `comments for length, clarity and` content." Did someone fail to edit the comment titled "Free boy," or is the language used at the end of the last sentence acceptable in your magazine? It certainly isn't acceptable in our home or family, and as an influence in society we think you should do better!
Let's work toward a better newspaper (and nation). That includes our choice of words that come out of our mouth and especially those that show up on the printed page! Let's improve the educational level instead of being on the decline.
via the Internet
Ugly filmmakers are best
The moral of the whole John Edwards affair thing is that if you are running for president, don't hire a filmmaker who looks like a Penthouse Pet to make a documentary about your campaign.
I'm surprised Elizabeth Edwards didn't catch that detail and say, "You want to have a filmmaker make a documentary about your campaign, you get Michael Moore to do it."
Wes Pierce, Orlando
It's Buddy's fault
Hey Billy Manes: Next time you caterwaul about the GOP, it may be worth remembering Orlando's money woes come with Dems running everything `"Busting the budget," Sept. 18`. Buddy Dyer and gang certainly didn't cause the economy to crash, but they did cause the budget and taxes to be what they are. Of course, Orlando's budget is probably George Bush's fault (in your mind) too.