NationStates Jolt Archive

I just got another copy of the Obsession DVD (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obsession:_Radical_Islam%E2%80%99s_War_Against_the_West) in the mail today. I got another one in a newspaper insert a few weeks ago. Haven't watched either of them yet. Have you?

Various news outlets have carried stories (http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081004/NEWS07/81004017/1009/NEWS07) on the newspaper distribution of 28 million copies in the form of an advertising insert. 28 million copies! How many DVDs does Netflix stock in their warehouses? I'm betting it's a comparable number. Now they're doing direct mail, ala the old AOL CDs I used to get twice a week. This can't be cheap.

I don't know anything about the Clarion Fund (http://www.clarionfund.org/). Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarion_Fund) says it shares an address with Jewish organization Aish HaTorah (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aish_Hatorah). Someone on the wiki talk page tried to link it to Stass Communications, owned by Arianna Huffington; and it's widely believed to be an attempt by someone to influence the US 2008 elections.

As I said, I haven't viewed it ... yet. Reviews seem to agree that the content is pretty slanted, and attempts to paint most Muslims with the radical brush. That doesn't really surprise me, nor would it annoy me much, if it weren't for invisible hand behind this distribution effort. I expect slanted opinion from the internet, from YouTube, from Michael Moore and PNAC and anyone else with strong views.

I just want to know who is spending tens or hundreds of millions of dollars to make sure that every American home has a copy or two on hand.

Anybody got any better picture on this?

I have never even heard of this before. I'd be very interested to know more, so I hope some answers links get offered soon. Direct mail propaganda? Screw that -- it's bad enough when I have to throw away paper junk mail, now they're sending us high tech garbage?

It could be a ploy of apocalyptic evangelicals to bring the final battle at Har Megiddo a step closer.

I just got another copy of the Obsession DVD (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obsession:_Radical_Islam%E2%80%99s_War_Against_the_West) in the mail today. I got another one in a newspaper insert a few weeks ago. Haven't watched either of them yet. Have you?

Various news outlets have carried stories (http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081004/NEWS07/81004017/1009/NEWS07) on the newspaper distribution of 28 million copies in the form of an advertising insert. 28 million copies! How many DVDs does Netflix stock in their warehouses? I'm betting it's a comparable number. Now they're doing direct mail, ala the old AOL CDs I used to get twice a week. This can't be cheap.

I don't know anything about the Clarion Fund (http://www.clarionfund.org/). Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarion_Fund) says it shares an address with Jewish organization Aish HaTorah (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aish_Hatorah). Someone on the wiki talk page tried to link it to Stass Communications, owned by Arianna Huffington; and it's widely believed to be an attempt by someone to influence the US 2008 elections.

As I said, I haven't viewed it ... yet. Reviews seem to agree that the content is pretty slanted, and attempts to paint most Muslims with the radical brush. That doesn't really surprise me, nor would it annoy me much, if it weren't for invisible hand behind this distribution effort. I expect slanted opinion from the internet, from YouTube, from Michael Moore and PNAC and anyone else with strong views.

I just want to know who is spending tens or hundreds of millions of dollars to make sure that every American home has a copy or two on hand.

Anybody got any better picture on this?

I am appalled by your cynicism and desire to assess things in light of the source.

The Clarion Fund is an indepedent, non-profit 501(c)3 organization that simply wants to educate Americans about issue of national security. Your suggestion that its even possible for this to be a disingenuous front for political reasons, when the Clarion Fund explicitly eschews funding from the government or political institutions is grotesquely pejorative.

I urge all of you that reject Frisbeeteria's reactionist urge for such uncalled for slander in the form of looking for more information to contact info@clarionfund.org.

Just put "Attn: Ms. Coulter" in the subject line.

That's a joke, she would never work with Jews, as they are imperfect by dint of not being Christians.







I'm getting banned again, aren't I?

A better question would be: do you want to get banned? It is a rather safe way to pose yourself as a martyr without all the nasty suffering that is usually associated with that title.

Despite being a staunch enemy of radical Islam and all, accused fairly often of unfairly broad-brushing "all" Muslims, etc. etc. I must say I found it impossible to watch more than a minute or so of that disc. It's mostly useful as a beer coaster. Too bad I don't drink beer anymore.

i received 2 copies in the mail about a week ago.

i didnt look at it.

but i do wonder whats on it.

A better question would be: do you want to get banned? It is a rather safe way to pose yourself as a martyr without all the nasty suffering that is usually associated with that title.

See, there, right there, is exactly the hurtful cynicism that is obscuring this entire issue.

Well you can ban me, you can point out how needlessly melodramatic is to moan about being banned, you can even miss the fact that the ban reference was self-caricature, but what you CAN'T do is silence the Clarion Fund and its well stated educational motives by exploring the timing and character of their material and its authors.

i received 2 copies in the mail about a week ago.

i didnt look at it.

but i do wonder whats on it.

One is for you and one is for a friend of yours who might wish to be educated on national security issues, by the indepedent and impartial educators who brought you "The Third Jihad" and other such documentaries that help Americans understand who the bad guys are.

Now, stop bellyaching about the economy, civil rights, or the broader and more inclusive issues of the time, and understand that we are at war with terror.

And Fear Elementals are immune to non-magic weapons, so defense spending is a central issue.

To their credit, their media listing (http://www.obsessionthemovie.com/media_online.php) includes distinctly unfavorable reviews, such as this NY Times article (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/26/movies/26docu.html?_r=1&oref=slogin) on the movie:
But others see it as biased. Arnold Leder, a political scientist at Texas State University, San Marcos, decided not to use it for his course “The Politics of Extremism” because of what he called “serious flaws,” including that it did not address Islam in general, the history of Islam and the schisms within the faith.

“If it were used in a class,” he said, “it would have to be treated as a polemic and placed in that context.”

Rabbi Chaim Seidler-Feller, director of U.C.L.A. Hillel, called the documentary propaganda and said it was “a way to transfer the Middle East conflict to the campus, to promote hostility.”

While the film carries cautions at the beginning and end that it is only about Islamist extremists — and that most Muslims are peaceful and do not support terror — Muslim students who have protested say they believe the documentary will still fuel prejudice.

“The movie was so well crafted and emotion manipulating that I felt myself thinking poorly of some aspects of Islam,” said Adam Osman, president of Stony Brook’s Muslim Students’ Association, who asked that it not be shown.
(emphasis mine)

Yeah, if they can get Muslim activists thinking poorly about themselves, I'm guessing the filmmakers have pulled emotional switches that even Leni Riefenstahl (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leni_Riefenstahl) never tried. That said, I enjoyed aspects of "Triumph of the Will", so I'll give this one a shot too.

I just got another copy of the Obsession DVD (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obsession:_Radical_Islam%E2%80%99s_War_Against_the_West) in the mail today. I got another one in a newspaper insert a few weeks ago. Haven't watched either of them yet. Have you?

Various news outlets have carried stories (http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081004/NEWS07/81004017/1009/NEWS07) on the newspaper distribution of 28 million copies in the form of an advertising insert. 28 million copies! How many DVDs does Netflix stock in their warehouses? I'm betting it's a comparable number. Now they're doing direct mail, ala the old AOL CDs I used to get twice a week. This can't be cheap.

I don't know anything about the Clarion Fund (http://www.clarionfund.org/). Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarion_Fund) says it shares an address with Jewish organization Aish HaTorah (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aish_Hatorah). Someone on the wiki talk page tried to link it to Stass Communications, owned by Arianna Huffington; and it's widely believed to be an attempt by someone to influence the US 2008 elections.

As I said, I haven't viewed it ... yet. Reviews seem to agree that the content is pretty slanted, and attempts to paint most Muslims with the radical brush. That doesn't really surprise me, nor would it annoy me much, if it weren't for invisible hand behind this distribution effort. I expect slanted opinion from the internet, from YouTube, from Michael Moore and PNAC and anyone else with strong views.

I just want to know who is spending tens or hundreds of millions of dollars to make sure that every American home has a copy or two on hand.

Anybody got any better picture on this?

They didn't send us a copy. :(

Obviously they think Georgia already hates Islam.

Oh great. Now the absolute morons who believe in ZOG will have one more piece of 'evidence' to support their zionist conspiracy theories.

I have never even heard of this before. I'd be very interested to know more, so I hope some answers links get offered soon. Direct mail propaganda? Screw that -- it's bad enough when I have to throw away paper junk mail, now they're sending us high tech garbage?

It's rather disturbing.

If I had deep enough pockets, could I mass mail out a DVD calling for the expulsion of all 'whiteys' from 'our land'? Would that be alright, because I paid for it?

Free speech's a bitch ain't it?

Free speech's a bitch ain't it?

That goes a bit beyond free speech. That's creating a platform from which to impose your bullshit speech on others.

I can almost guarantee you that doing this in Canada would have you brought before a Human Rights Commission, getting raped in the ass by fines, and as many problems as I have with the HRC system here, I wouldn't think it unfair.

Free speech's a bitch ain't it?

I'd like to hear you still claim that after someone makes a DVD film out of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion and mass mails it to everyone.

O, the things I miss by being such an obvious liberal. Neither I nor anyone I know has received a copy. Has anyone watched it? I'm somewhat jealous, as I collect wacky political stuff.

I've gotten a copy of this piece of crap. I summarily tossed it in the trash where it belongs. (I was going to break the disc first, but I didn't want to hurt myself somehow in the process.)

I'd like to hear you still claim that after someone makes a DVD film out of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion and mass mails it to everyone.

when I was in highschool, a group of neo nazis planned a rally in town. The town moved to set up an ordinance for the purpose of banning the rally. Numerous individuals wrote letters to the town board protesting this plan, stating that they had the right to rally if they so chose. The board eventually abandoned the plan, based on the letter writers.

I was one of them.

when I was in highschool, a group of neo nazis planned a rally in town. The town moved to set up an ordinance for the purpose of banning the rally. Numerous individuals wrote letters to the town board protesting this plan, stating that they had the right to rally if they so chose. The board eventually abandoned the plan, based on the letter writers.

I was one of them.

I love it when you tell the story of how we met.

While I support absolutely the right to free speech, I think this is more in the region of spam advertising. Were they simply wanting to rally in the streets, or hold a seminar, or hand them out on the street corner even, that would be different. But mailing them to people's houses, without being solicited is an attempt to impose your beliefs on those households. It's entering someone's house without invitation, and in the case of me, if I received one, pissing on my carpet.

It's entering someone's house without invitation, and in the case of me, if I received one, pissing on my carpet.

Dude...

That goes a bit beyond free speech. That's creating a platform from which to impose your bullshit speech on others.

I can almost guarantee you that doing this in Canada would have you brought before a Human Rights Commission, getting raped in the ass by fines, and as many problems as I have with the HRC system here, I wouldn't think it unfair.

I'm going to be briefly serious, which for me is like passing a kidney stone while being forced to watch a remake of "Heat" starring Matt Damon and Ben Affleck, with the remaining cast filled out by runners up from American Idol.

To what extent is the objectionable nature of the material part of your concern? Is it solely the manner of dissemination, or does some of your opposition stem from the content?

I'm not sure I'd be willing to have critique of the content of the material itself impact an assessment of whether its means of delivery goes beyond free speech.

God that hurts.

Free speech's a bitch ain't it?"This country needs more free speech worth listening to."-Hansell B. Duckett.
Don't you agree?

I'm going to be briefly serious, which for me is like passing a kidney stone while being forced to watch a remake of "Heat" starring Matt Damon and Ben Affleck, with the remaining cast filled out by runners up from American Idol.

To what extent is the objectionable nature of the material part of your concern? Is it solely the manner of dissemination, or does some of your opposition stem from the content?

I'm not sure I'd be willing to have critique of the content of the material itself impact an assessment of whether its means of delivery goes beyond free speech.

God that hurts.


I know that this was directed at Neesika, but since my original response was similar, I would like to respond to this as well. Apologies if this is presumptuous of me.

I find any political group delivering any sort of political message to my house without my express permission disgusting in the least. When it is a message I disagree with, it is particularly insidious to me obviously.

But I treat all political entities the same. When I receive mailouts, I call their office and politely request that they cease and desist as I find it offensive.

I know that this was directed at Neesika, but since my original response was similar, I would like to respond to this as well. Apologies if this is presumptuous of me.

I find any political group delivering any sort of political message to my house without my express permission disgusting in the least. When it is a message I disagree with, it is particularly insidious to me obviously.

But I treat all political entities the same. When I receive mailouts, I call their office and politely request that they cease and desist as I find it offensive.

Its an open board, and you're response speaks directly to my question. So, unsolicited mass mailings is a mode of speech you particularly object to, and not solely when its of content you object, if I'm following.

I so despise conventional discussion. Now my gums are bleeding.

Its an open board, and you're response speaks directly to my question. So, unsolicited mass mailings is a mode of speech you particularly object to, and not solely when its of content you object, if I'm following.

I so despise conventional discussion. Now my gums are bleeding.

Yes, that would be a fair assessment. Sorry to injure you through all this seriousness.

I have no problem with free speech on the internet, in public forums, on the street corner etc. I have no problem with the distribution of any sort of material in the public arena. Just don't invade my home unless I ask you to.

It's a front for an Israeli lobby trying to get Americans afraid of Muslims(and Palestinians by proxy) to get them to vote Republican who will in turn continue to bomb darkies. It's rubbish, pure and simple and that's where I put my copy.

when I was in highschool, a group of neo nazis planned a rally in town. The town moved to set up an ordinance for the purpose of banning the rally. Numerous individuals wrote letters to the town board protesting this plan, stating that they had the right to rally if they so chose. The board eventually abandoned the plan, based on the letter writers.

I was one of them.

What town was that?

What town was that?

Pretty sure it was somewhere in the Chicago area. Right, Elwood?

http://i18.tinypic.com/2eatmk4.jpg

I hate Illinois Nazis...

Pretty sure it was somewhere in the Chicago area. Right, Elwood?

http://i18.tinypic.com/2eatmk4.jpg

See, I was being all serious and stuff with him, because we're both in the Greater Boston area, and you went and did that. For shame.

I hate Illinois Nazis...

:fluffle:

Sweet home Chicago!

Pretty sure it was somewhere in the Chicago area. Right, Elwood?

http://i18.tinypic.com/2eatmk4.jpg

I don't remember one in Elwood, but I know for sure there was one in Skokie.

I hate Illinois Nazis...

Oh admit it, you just hate Illinois! :p

I'm going to be briefly serious, which for me is like passing a kidney stone while being forced to watch a remake of "Heat" starring Matt Damon and Ben Affleck, with the remaining cast filled out by runners up from American Idol.

To what extent is the objectionable nature of the material part of your concern? Is it solely the manner of dissemination, or does some of your opposition stem from the content?

I'm not sure I'd be willing to have critique of the content of the material itself impact an assessment of whether its means of delivery goes beyond free speech.

God that hurts.
:D I bet!

It's not actually the content itself. I object to the idea that free speech necessarily extends to intruding to this extent on others. It could be a Mary Kay advert with Dolly Parton singing 'Jolene' (best song ever) throughout the whole thing, and I'd be disturbed.

No one gets to come into my house and yell at me about how awesome it is to eat Big Macs. And fair enough, I don't have to watch this DVD, I don't have to bring it into my house from the mailbox. But no, it's the method of delivery that is bothering me.

:D I bet!

It's not actually the content itself. I object to the idea that free speech necessarily extends to intruding to this extent on others. It could be a Mary Kay advert with Dolly Parton singing 'Jolene' (best song ever) throughout the whole thing, and I'd be disturbed.

No one gets to come into my house and yell at me about how awesome it is to eat Big Macs. And fair enough, I don't have to watch this DVD, I don't have to bring it into my house from the mailbox. But no, it's the method of delivery that is bothering me.

"Jolene" is so not the best song ever. A woman cheated on by her partner begs the 'other woman' to let her keep the cheating dog?

It's a good song, and very pretty. I have the Dolly version, the SIsters of Mercy cover, the One Dove cover, and a White Stripes live version... but it's SO not the best ever...

"Jolene" is so not the best song ever. A woman cheated on by her partner begs the 'other woman' to let her keep the cheating dog?

It's a good song, and very pretty. I have the Dolly version, the SIsters of Mercy cover, the One Dove cover, and a White Stripes live version... but it's SO not the best ever...

The covers you've mentioned absolutely suck donkey balls, and when I say things like 'best song ever' I am speaking in excited hyperbole because when I like something, I like it intensely right NOW and at this moment, it is indeed the best song ever.

Tomorrow, it may be another one. :p

I like it because it's so raw, and vulnerable.

The covers you've mentioned absolutely suck donkey balls, and when I say things like 'best song ever' I am speaking in excited hyperbole because when I like something, I like it intensely right NOW and at this moment, it is indeed the best song ever.

Tomorrow, it may be another one. :p

I like it because it's so raw, and vulnerable.

I'm inclined to agree that the White Stripes version is a bit ropey, and the One Dove cover is little more than cute - but the Sisters version is pretty fantastic, actually.

I like "Jolene", but there's never likely to be a day when I say it's anywhere close to best, simply because the central premise is so weak - not fighting for what you believe in, not kicking someone to the kerb for discarding you - but pleading with someone to stop helping your cheating s.o. cheat. It strikes me as a spineless whining song that portrays women in an incredibly bad light. I hate to think of anyone calling it 'best ever'. It's such a destructive role model.

If I want raw and vulnerable, I'll take "The Letter" by Kristin Hersh, or "I'll Kill Her" by Soko.

I just got another copy of the Obsession DVD (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obsession:_Radical_Islam%E2%80%99s_War_Against_the_West) in the mail today. I got another one in a newspaper insert a few weeks ago. Haven't watched either of them yet. Have you?

Various news outlets have carried stories (http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081004/NEWS07/81004017/1009/NEWS07) on the newspaper distribution of 28 million copies in the form of an advertising insert. 28 million copies! How many DVDs does Netflix stock in their warehouses? I'm betting it's a comparable number. Now they're doing direct mail, ala the old AOL CDs I used to get twice a week. This can't be cheap.

I don't know anything about the Clarion Fund (http://www.clarionfund.org/). Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarion_Fund) says it shares an address with Jewish organization Aish HaTorah (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aish_Hatorah). Someone on the wiki talk page tried to link it to Stass Communications, owned by Arianna Huffington; and it's widely believed to be an attempt by someone to influence the US 2008 elections.

As I said, I haven't viewed it ... yet. Reviews seem to agree that the content is pretty slanted, and attempts to paint most Muslims with the radical brush. That doesn't really surprise me, nor would it annoy me much, if it weren't for invisible hand behind this distribution effort. I expect slanted opinion from the internet, from YouTube, from Michael Moore and PNAC and anyone else with strong views.

I just want to know who is spending tens or hundreds of millions of dollars to make sure that every American home has a copy or two on hand.

Anybody got any better picture on this?


didn't get one... yet...

wanna send me yours? I can use another coaster...

"This country needs more free speech worth listening to."-Hansell B. Duckett.
Don't you agree?

Yes, but that doesn't mean we should block the free speech that isn't. A thought that just occurred to me (that I might decide to take advantage of myself since both my wife and I got separate copies) is that those who get these discs can exercise their own freedom of speech by protesting their receipt of these DVDs in the following manner:

Paint the shiny part with nail polish (your favorite color). Be sure to get full coverage. Let it dry. Mail it back to the sender postage due.

"Jolene" is so not the best song ever. A woman cheated on by her partner begs the 'other woman' to let her keep the cheating dog?

It's a good song, and very pretty. I have the Dolly version, the SIsters of Mercy cover, the One Dove cover, and a White Stripes live version... but it's SO not the best ever...
there is no cheating necessary in the song. the woman is recognizing that her man is obsessed with jolene and wants her to leave him alone.

and the sherrie austin cover is pretty damned good too.

I think there's nothing wrong to admit that someone has the power to take something dear away from you, and having a frank conversation about that fact, that doesn't involve violence.

This from someone who generally resorts to violence. And today, it is the best song ever. To me. I could care less if you dislike it.

I think there's nothing wrong to admit that someone has the power to take something dear away from you, and having a frank conversation about that fact, that doesn't involve violence.

This from someone who generally resorts to violence. And today, it is the best song ever. To me. I could care less if you dislike it.

That's the beauty of opinions. You can't be 'wrong', and the approval of others is never more than incidental.

I don't agree with your analysis of the themes... but I guess that's what makes it art.

What town was that?

Ah, no where you'd know. I didn't get to the Boston area until my adult life. This was in the frozen backwater of upstate NY.

Ah, no where you'd know. I didn't get to the Boston area until my adult life. This was in the frozen backwater of upstate NY.

Anywhere near Oneida? Given your background in Physics that'd be an odd coincidence, as my boss is from that area (And is also a former poli-sci/physics dual major).