What a topsy turvy this world is. Here is a perfect example of the West completely missing the point. While the muslim world wants to re-instate the caliphate through murder and subjugation, here you have an example of the blind West honouring a splinter of that muslim world for their effort to further that very cause. There is a saying "a stitch in time saves nine". The deadline for that stitch has passed. More than 9 stitches are required to set things right. The longer the West takes to react to the muslim threat the bigger the quantity of blood will end up being spilled!

as the film industry. I just had a graduate telling me about how terrible it was that the Israeli's took away all the Palestinian's land. He had no give and take on the matter. Globalization was evil, Jews should give all of Israel back to the oppressed Palestinians. These wonderful American colleges are pushing these philosophies. So why should anyone be supprised when the film industry portrays the terrorists as the good guys? The Saudi's are giving 40 million to two colleges for muslim studies. Yale has the former minister of information for the Taliban studying at their University. Proudly might I add. When being interviewed before 9-11, the former information minister stared incessantly at the world trade center. He was asked by the reporter, " What are you looking at?" Needless to say, later, his wonderful misunderstood friend Bin Laden, Blew both towers up, shortly there after. This information minister explained away Bin Laden's destruction of the Buddhist statues also. They were an abomination to Islam. Yale has this wonderful Terrorist now. He'll probably be running some film class in the near future. They'll be turning out over educated terrorists then. Do you think Al Qaeda will turn them away, because they are over educated? Or will they use them to run their propoganda against the infidel West, and Israel?

What do you expect fro the "jews"of hollywood. How many movies did they ever make that portrayed the Jew as a hero or as a good person? They do not care about us here in Israel. One or two come for a visit and the media and politicians fawn over them. If some of them took an interest in the well-being of Israel there could have been a few movies out that would have portrayed us in a positive light to the world. I wonder if this movie would have won awards and nominations if there was a suicide bombing at last year's golden globes or oscar ceremony?

The damage has already, but the case, which is already there should be stated. http://www.geocities.com/activezionism/Propaganda/PARADISENOW.html

Freedom of speech...freedom of expression??? anyone remember these things?? God you people are so ignorant, predjudice, and biased...what a screwed up trio! You can't accept what you so want to force on others!! Keep talking about freedom of speech and how it is at the core of all liberties and then when anything that is not to your liking is said about the israeli-arab conflict, you go all out!! ANYONE WHO THINKS THAT THIS MOVIE SHOULD NOT GET THE RECOGNITION IT'S GETTING HAS NO RIGHT TO BE TALKING ABOUT FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION!!

http://www.petitiononline.com/060201/petition.html

betwenn the freedom of speech and the freedom to murderer.

You miss the point again. When a little cartoon is publisehd (that made fun of a fictional prophet), the whole muslim world turns irate and people riot and burn buildings. Now, we have a movie which glorifies the murdering of Jews (real people), but that's ok with you. You are truelly ridiculous!!!

#5 said it perfectly! It's not up to you to decide what's freedom of speech and freedom "to murder" as you put it, which sounds rediculous by the way. This is freedom of speech. This is what you people stand so firmly for (or say you do). Freedom of speech doesn't mean "freedom of appeasement to Jews." It's still free speech if you don't like the viewpoint!

EXACTLY! If a cartoonist can not freely express his work without "causing" muslims to lose control of themselves, why is it o.k. to glorify murder of innocent civilians in this pathetic film? I don't want to discourage muslims from contributing something to the arts and humanities....it would be welcome.....but they have to do better than this.

And I intend to protect it and the right to have it, against murderers and inciters. And thank you for clarifying that freedom of speech is something, which we stand for (and you don’t). We also stand for the freedom to live, which you don’t. Oh, and no one is trying to shut down this film, just to keep it of the Oscar’s list.

"We also stand for the freedom to live, which you don’t." Dude, you sound rediculous, you really do. I don't stand for the freedom to live?? LOL What does that even mean?? You obviously haven't seen the movie, if you did you'd know that it's absolutely NOT glorifying suicide bombing.

I'm gonna take some time and reply to your ignorance although i promised myself not to ever waste my time with people like you. Saying that the movie "glorifies the murdering jews" shows that you probably havent seen the movie and if you have...you're pretty stupid. To say that a movie that glorfies killing a whole people was nominated for a gloden globe and an oscar is pretty much contradictory. Regardless of whether you've seen the movie or not, if you cant realize that an American association, especially that of the oscars, would NEVER nominate a so called movie that glorifies the killing of people, and especially jews, you must be out of your mind! The greater part of the world seems to disagree with your stupidity...wonder why...hmmm. The problem is that you can't handle any free speech that you don't like. That's not really free speech is it then you very very smart person! Whether you like it or not...it's free speech so get over it moron...

Do not even assume all Americans approve of that show. Most of what Hollywood does is reprehensible. I personally think the Jews should take matters into their own hands, elect a leader with some kind of backbone and send the Islamic horde to wherever it wishes, in the end, to be. Even if it's Jordan.

I am a proud American Jew who happened to catch Paradise Now in Chicago. For an hour and a half I was transported to a place I had never been where I saw things I have never seen. The film, critical of Israel without browbeating, does NOT glorify suicide bombers; it depicts a 24 hour period in the lives of two young men who have chosen to do that. As a film it is taut, and has elements of a thriller. Far from being a polemic, there is a female character who speaks brilliantly as the voice of logic and reason, making powerful arguments against the despicable act of suicide bombing. The two leads are not played as fanatics, but as conflicted human beings. Perhaps it's easier to think of these people as rabid animals instead of human beings, since the choice they make is so irrational on its face, but that does not make it so. Abu-Asaad has made a wonderful film, and for those who think he condones suicide bombing, consider the intentionally humorous scene where Khaled makes his speech for the video camera. First the camera malfunctions, then on the next take the men behind the camera pass around pita sandwiches. By the time Khaled is done, his impassioned speech has turned into a request for his mother to purchase water fiters at a store that sells them more cheaply. We may not agree with our opposition, but arguing against the showing of a film, or for the removal from consideration of an award does not make the underlying problem disappear. This is a unique, well-made film that deserves consideration from the Academy; their responsibility is to recognize artistically significant films, not judge content.

You’ll never be in even if you wanted too. In the real Nablus suicide bombers are glorified as heroes, gunmen roam the street, and kids are thought to hate all Jews, Bloomfield MI. And exactly which of the girl’s arguments was so powerful, the stuttering tactical one, or the hysteric unformulated moral one? She made no case for moral arguments, and non-was made. http://zionismontheweb.org/boards/viewtopic.php?t=383

The writer points out, correctly, that I've never been to Nablus. I wasn't at Auschwitz during WWII either, and was only three at the time of the Munich Massacre and too young to remember. I have read books and seen films depitciting these events, however. Schindler's List showed me something I had never quite seen, as did Munich and One Day In September. Paradise Now is a film about 24 hours (the last 24 in one case) in the lives of two would-be suicide bombers. As a film - as I said earlier - it works. It is well-directed and fascinating in that it takes the viewer someplace he or she will never otherwise go. Whether or not it glorifies suicide bombers is a matter on which we disagree and could debate endlessly. Four and a half years ago my country suffered a terrible tragedy when 3,000 people were killed in an act of terrorism. Though the event affected me profoundly, I never lost sight of the fact that in other parts of the world that death toll is business as usual. Israelis have been living the 9/11 world for almost sixty years. In the near future, a film by Oliver Stone is going to be made about that day. Surviving family members may find that film too painful to attend, but that does not mean that the event never happened. In the same vein, peitioning the Academy to recall Paradise Now from the Best Foreign Film category won't make suicide bombers disappear, nor will it bring back the victims of it. In a tangentially related topic, the Austrian government jailed anit-Semetic historian David Irving for being a hateful bigot. His idiotic denials of the Holocaust will not make the Holocaust disappear, but silencing his right to an opinon - no matter how whacked out an opinion it may be - is bad for everyone in the long run - especially minorities in the world like us Jews. My larger point is this: Let's let Paradise Now be judged for what it was - a film. The irony with these types of protests is always the same; those who are most offended always do the best job of bringing attention to the object of the disagreement. As an 8 year old boy I remember the Nazis wanting to parade through Skokie, IL, a very heavily Jewish suburb of Chicago which at the time had a disproportionately large number of Holocaust survivors. The right play then - as it is now - was to ignore it. I would have loved to have seen national network footage of these morons goose-stepping through the town as nobody paid even a drop of attention. It would have been humiliating and dispiriting to the Nazis, who would have eventually just given up and left. So much more has now been made of Paradise Now because of this petition that people who had never and would never have heard of the film now have. I am not advocating non-violence and impassivity. If our enemies attack us it is our responsibility to protect ourselves and return the favor tenfold. If it's a film or a march that you disagree with, you're better off ignoring it. The Paradise Now protests and petition have become an object lesson in that.

This film has been ignored, but with a Golden Glob and an Oscar, it cannot be ignored. You want it be judged for what it is, a film, fine – but its not just a film, it is also propaganda, as explained in this link, again http://www.geocities.com/activezionism/Propaganda/PARADISENOW.html This is not an issue of free speech or publicity, it’s about the social approval of mass murder. And the Oscar represents the highest social approval in the film industry. Do you want some kid in your neighborhood or somewhere else nearby to think it’s ok and blow up himself with many others over trivial grievances? Where there enough high school shootings in the US?

If an Academy Award represents social approval then they've approved of the Mafia (twice), Vietnam (twice), and flesh-eating murder, among other things. I don't follow the logic that seeing violence in a film sends the message that violence is acceptable. You refer opaquely to Columbine. I went to high school in the US, and saw hundreds of films during that time, some quite violent. Viewing these films did not incite me to violence, nor did it for the 2,000 other kids in my class. Your thinking smacks of "out of sight, out of mind". I don't care for the idea of censorship, save for a few exceptions that are outlined in my country's constitution and corresponding jurisprudence. I'd prefer to see an open marketplace of ideas. I am a proud Jew, and not insensitive to the very precarious place we occupy in the world. WIth that in mind it was a difficult experience watching Paradise Now and its open hostility to Israel. At the end I was no more sympathetic to the Arab cause than I was before I walked into the theater. I had, however, been entertained by a well-constructed and fascinating film. That was what I had paid my $9.50 for.

I do not recall an Oscar film showing Mafia or Vietnam War as good things. Or any other war for that matter. And I do not recall a flash eating aliens movie receiving a major Oscar. The history of the Oscars however has a good share of films that help improve society, dealt with racism, anti-Semitism, autism, gender issues, the horrors of war, and more. So yes, the Oscars do play a social role, and largely good one. Viewing violent b-movies (and better ones) did not incite you for violence nor 2,000 others, I can say the same thing, but all it takes one, one and many will suffer. As for ‘Paradise Now’, I do not mine a film against the Israeli government, against each and every Israeli civilian, that inability to see victims on the other side; that I do mine, and that is what that film is about. You say this film did not affect your views, this is the least of my concerns in this matter, but what about others? For many it’s the first source of information.