SunnyHello Nice effects though.

Janae Milner Easily the biggest piece of Right wing non sense propaganda I ever saw.

Gary The movie's not perfect, but it sticks the landing of its message. It was engaging - thrilling at times - and I personally thought it was a great time.

Guillelmina The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

Benny Lau (Spoiler Alert)This film is a 2005 documentary about the threat of radical Islam in our world today. It does this primarily by using extensive Arab television footage as a means to give us an "insider view" of the radical views Islam extremists have and preach/incite in their campaign of holy war or "jihad". Many parallels are also made between radical Islam and the Nazi campaign in World War II to exterminate the Jews. One of the most profound messages in the documentary is stated in the beginning as, "This is a film about radical Islamic terror. A dangerous ideology, fueled by religious hatred. It's important to remember most Muslims are peaceful and do not support terror. This is not a film about them. This is a film about a radical worldview, and the threat it poses to us all, Muslim and non-Muslim alike." It is fundamentally important that Americans and the rest of the world make the distinction between ordinary Muslims and Islam extremists. Most Muslims are not responsible for the Islamic acts of terrorist that have taken place in our world today. These attacks happen only because Muslim fundamentalists interpret the Qu'ran in their own convoluted way and henceforth use their religion to justify extreme acts of violence and hatred. What is also fundamentally important to be known is that Islam is a religion of love and peace, not the culture of hostility and brutality that is so over portrayed in the Western media.However, this documentary also conveys a cautionary tone. It warns that within the Muslim faith (with a population of 1 billion people), about 10% to 15% of followers believe in or are willing to engage in and conduct acts of extremism and fundamentalism. More than that, these individuals are spread evenly all over the world as opposed to being concentrated in one geographic location, making it more difficult to combat any potential acts of extremism or terrorism should they arise. The film warns that the Anti-American followers consist of an even greater portion of the Muslim faith population. There is a conviction amongst Muslim fundamentalists that the West (United States, Great Britain, etc) is engaged in a conspiracy to subjugate Islam. Henceforth, by their logic, every honorable Muslim and non-Muslim must stand against the West and Israel. Muslim extremists believe that their Jihad is to conquer the world for Allah. Unlike Buddhist followers, who tolerates all manners of faith and religions, Muslim extremists see Islam as against all religions because it is the one and only worthy worship. In a coordinated effort of intolerance, Muslim extremism has permeated the media and used various forms of propaganda to demonize Westerners and Jews. But why else is extremism and fundamentalism so prevalent in Muslim societies? One theory explored in this documentary is that Arab dictators are inciting Muslims to direct their anger and hatred toward Western societies. Using Western societies as a scapegoat, Arab dictators hope that the general Muslim population would think that the societal problems and abuses are perpetuated by the West and not by the dictators themselves. Uniting the Muslim population against a common foreign enemy allows them to stay in power. These dictators claim that the real enemy is modernism because it contradicts Sharia law. Also, by upholding Sharia law, dictators effectively prevent any chances of upward societal mobility and progression where equal rights and opportunities may be open for all. Because this documentary was filmed in 2005 (7 years ago), the legitimacy and relevance of the content in this film should be questioned accordingly. The timestamps of most Arab television footage is pre-2004. However, though the dangers of Islamic terrorism may be not as prevalent or relevant as they were prior to 9/11 or during the peak of the Post Iraq War invasion, the United States nonetheless has a continuing obligation to look after it's civilians and protect them from enemies both domestic and abroad. The Christmas Day bombing of 2009 shows that despite technological advances, Muslim extremists will continue to seek ways to destabilize the American way of life and endanger if not exterminate the lives of Americans whenever the opportunity arises. The fundamental differences between Muslim and extremists…One instance is the differing interpretations of the Muslim word "Jihad". To Muslim radicals, this term implies a sacred and holy war fought against infidels, primarily the United States and Israel, in the name of Allah. For most Muslims however, the term implies an inner struggle to look within you and make yourself a better person (in Arabic). This interpretation is one among many of how Muslim radicals perceive religious texts and themes differently from traditional Muslims. Personally, I believe that this documentary is rather biased or Islamophobic and is more politically oriented as opposed to educating the general population about the presence and causes of radical Islam today. The release of the documentary suggests a post Iraq war agenda for the United States, suggested subtly by the widespread distribution of this film in swing states of the United States prior to the 2008 presidential elections. Also, this film could elaborate more on how radical Islam differs from traditional Islam on a fundamental level and differences in practices, everyday life, or more between the two. Overall, I would recommend this film to anyone curious enough to check it out but not deem it absolutely necessary to watch.

lastliberal In a recent British poll, George Bush was second to Osama bin Laden and ahead of Kim Jong-Il and Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as the person most threatening to world peace. So, since we are about to be ride of the second most dangerous person in the World, maybe we ought to know something about the man the British considers the first. Especially when taxpayers are paying to have the DVD distributed through their local newspapers.Of course, we have to take this film with a grain of salt - maybe a bucket of salt, as it is only promoted by Fox News, Glen Beck, Rush Limbaugh and the the right wing Olin Foundation.Despite the fact that one website called the Writer/Director Wayne Kopping "an award-winning filmmaker," I can find no evidence of this and he has only made anti-Muslim films to the best of my knowledge. It has to be noted that his background makes making these films a logical step. Do not expect an unbiased approach.There is a distinct pro-Israel bias in the presentation of information in this so-called anti-extremist Muslim film. The overwhelming data presented is pertaining to those who hate Israel, and by extension we are supposed to believe they hate Westerners. They hate Westerners and the US to the extent that they support Israel. No nation that is not overtly pro-Israel is mentioned, nor are any examples given of terrorist attacks.The question of why they attacked a the US on 9/11 is quickly dismissed as irrelevant and the terrorism is directly attached to religious belief. It is well documented that Osama bin Laden attacked the US because of our military forces in the Islamic Holy Land.Those who watch this expecting an unbiased approach are advised that they are getting the same propaganda that the film criticizes.

strumdatjag First: I have a political bias. I am a conservative Republican who SUPPORTS "W", his war on terror and the war in Iraq. Therefore, I agree with the central premise of this film - That Militant Islamism is today's greatest threat to world stability and peace and that this is a time for us to be like Churchill rather than Ghandi. I also agree that politically correct peaceniks don't get it and undermine the war on terror so they can gain political advantage in order to enact things like socialized health-care. So I was disappointed with this blatant piece of propaganda. Please note that it is possible to make a good film which is blatant propaganda, even if it differs from one's political opinion. Unfortunately, Obsession is not one of these good pieces of propaganda. There are three problems with this film: too preachy, too sloppy and too obviously and unpersuasively propagandistic. The most impressive parts of this film are the clips of news footage from middle eastern television of hate-filled religious and political rallies and interviews with children who have been indoctrinated with islamist hate. Unfortunately, the clips are repeatedly interrupted with mostly unnecessary, preachy, "expert" commentary. This leaves a probably mistaken impression that the clips were being edited and taken out of context in order to promote the politics of the filmmaker. Except for the part of the film describing the "Matzo-Movie", the sources of the footage were not adequately described. The film was sloppy, i.e. poorly organized. Much like the NFL color commentator who won't shut up about the obvious ("You see here, how the quarterback hands off and the running back runs with the football"), the repetitious, preachy commentary destroys the impact of the great, scary footage which has been assembled. Why not describe how the footage was obtained and tell us how pervasive it is (Is it the #1 show or is it the equivalent of our Public Access TV)? Then show it and let the viewer come to the inescapable conclusion. The unnecessary, spooky music and intentional graining of the film was straight out of "Political Attack Ad 101". The disturbing footage does not need to be doctored and enhanced, since it loses its impact because it obviously looks doctored and enhanced. The most obvious propaganda is the long, botched attempt to equate Islamist Fascists with Nazism. Showing Nazis goose-stepping and comparing it to today's goose-stepping middle eastern armies proves nothing. It is a historically common way of marching and saluting in many countries, some very friendly to the west. It is not necessarily in a nostalgic homage to Uncle Adolf. This movie is a 4/10, one and a half star movie because the documentary certainly has some moments, which are unfortunately poorly presented by the filmmaker.

bradjohnson612 I agree with most of the comments here, except for certain ones by Aan, below. How perverse even to suggest there could be "another side to the story" that would possibly justify the *absolute* moral outrages documented in this film. If we can't even all agree that teaching and preaching hatred is inexcusable -- especially the vicious, institutionalized brand of it shown here -- then there is no hope for the planet.The film makes many interesting observations that are compelling in their truthfulness. One is that our dumb obsession with political correctness -- look at our media's reluctance even to give the enemy a name -- is the very thing the radicals exploit. We are shown incredible footage of them openly plotting our doom right in our midst, exploiting not only American hospitality, but civil liberties such as freedom of speech, which would be the first thing they'd take away from us if they could. Don't think for a second they aren't laughing at the irony -- or at us! This is an issue that, like global warming, should transcend US politics and any bickering between the Western Left and Right. People who offer excuses for what these psychopaths are doing and intend to keep on doing are, in the words of Lenin, "useful idiots" who help further their evil agenda.For the record, I'm a Democrat.