Well, of course.

Oliver Stone is a filmmaker, and he is in the business of making films that make money.

And the fact that some of the families of the 9-11 victims might be offended by his film (or any other film depicting the events of 9-11), is absolutely no reason for him not to make it.

Should Schindler's List not have been made because some survivors of the Holocaust or families of victims might have been offended by what was depicted?

Should Saving Private Ryan or The Longest Day not have been made because some survivors of the D-Day invasion or families of those killed might have been offended by what was depicted?

Should Pearl Harbor or Tora! Tora! Tora! not have been made because some survivors of the attack on Pear Harbor or families of victims might have been offended by what was depicted?

Should Paths of Glory or All Quiet on the Western Front not have been made because some survivors of the brutal trench warfare of World War I or families of its casulaties might have been offended by what was depicted?

Should Cold Mountain, depicting the horrors of the Civil War, not have been made because the families of some Civil War survivors took exceptionto the way thier ancestors were depicted?

Should Good Morning Viet Nam not have been made because it treated the tragedy of that particular war in a light and humorous manner which many survivors of Viet Nam or the families of those killed mught find offensive?

I could go on......

You want to give me the "it's too soon for a film about 9-11" argument, I might be inclined to agree with you, since it's evident by the reactions of many that they are still unable or not ready to come to terms with 9-11 as an historical event, and can only deal with it on an emotional level.

But to suggest that the fact that some people might be offended by such a film's content is a valid reason to not make the film in the first place is ridiculous.

As usual, economics will provide us with the answer.

If the film is popular and people go see it, then we were ready for it. If they don't go see it, then we weren't.

As far as the film itself goes, why don't we wait and see exactly how everything and everyone is depicted before we pass judgement on it.

No one, not Oliver Stone, not you or I, no one, is under any obligation to adhere to the wishes of the survivors of any of the victims of 9-11.

What about the controversy about what is to be done with the WTC site?

Should one or two people have the right to dictate what should or should not be built there based on the offending of their sensibilities