I SAW MUNICH, AND I FEEL IT IS BENEATH CONTEMPT. I REGRET HAVING TO DISAGREE SO STRONGLY WITH SEVERAL PEOPLE WHO HAVE WRITTEN ME ABOUT THEIR FAVORABLE RESPONSE. IT IS A SKILLFULLY AND CLEVERLY DONE ATTACK ON ISRAEL. IT ACCEPTS VIRTUALLY EVERY MAJOR PREMISE OF THE INFORMED OPPOSITION TO INDICT THE LEGITIMACY OF ISRAEL. I COULD GO ON AND ON, BUT I THINK THE ARTICLE BELOW MAKES THE POINT WELL -- THE ARABS HAVE PRIMACY ON THE 'HOMELAND' ISSUE IN THIS MOVIE. IT HAS THE USUAL CYCLE OF VIOLENCE BULLSHIT. EVERY RHETORICAL TRICK IS USED TO GIVE THE IMPRESSION OF EVEN-HANDEDNESS, BUT HISTORY IS TWISTED. THE USE OF MAZEL TOV BECAUSE THE MAIN CHARACTER'S WIFE IS PREGNANT AND THE USE OF MAZEL TOV WHEN A TERRORIST IS MURDERED -- OF COURSE, THE MOVIE DOES NOT DEPICT THEM AS TERRORISTS -- IS NOT ACCIDENTAL. THIS IS THE KIND OF MOVIE THAT IF YOU SEE OVER AND OVER AGAIN, YOU WILL SPOT MORE AND MORE EVIDENCE OF SUBTLETY TO UNDERMINE ANY MORAL ARGUMENT FOR ISRAEL, ANY MORAL ARGUMENT TO RESPOND TO TERRORISM. ITI S A MOVIE STEEPED IN MORAL RELATIVISM. IT HAS JUST ABOUT EVERY STANDARD LEFTIST TRITE KNEE-JERK ARGUMENT, INCLUDING THE USUAL PARANOIA AGAINST THE CIA. IF AN AVERAGE AMERICAN SEES THIS MOVIE, HE WOULD SIMPLY SAY A POX ON BOTH YOUR HOUSES, IN TERMS OF THE MIDEAST DISPUTE. INDEED, THIS MAKES THIS BASICALLY A DISPUTE ABOUT REAL ESTATE -- THE REVISIONIST ARAB LINE, AND NOT ONE OF HATRED -- WHERE SUBSTANTIAL NUMBERS OF ARABS WANT TO WIPE ISRAEL OFF THE FACE OF THE MAP. I THINK THE ARTICLE BELOW CAPTURES A LOT.

IT IS NO ACCIDENT THAT SPIELBERG PREVIOUSLY PRAISED CASTRO. HE JUST DOESN'T GET IT. A SUPER-RICH GUY WITH EVERYTHING, HE HAS NO REAL CONCEPT OF SELF-DEFENSE. HE IS CONSUMED WITH THE ART FORM, WITH HOW HE TELLS A STORY, AND HE IS A GENIUS IN THAT RESPECT, BUT HE IS, AT BEST, TERRIBLY MUDDLED AND A MORAL IDIOT. OF COURSE, HE COULD HAVE MADE HIS SAME POINTS IN A MOVIE THAT DIDN'T PRETEND ANY RESEMBLANCE TO REALITY; HE COULD HAVE MADE A MOVIE THAT HAD NOTHING TO DO ABOUT MUNICH, THAT DEALT WITH HIS PARTICULAR AMBIVALENCE ABOUT SELF-DEFENSE. THIS IS NOT A GUY I'D WANT NEXT TO ME IN THE TRENCHES OR TO CONFRONT ARMED THUGS AND RAPISTS. BUT HE DIDN'T. HE TOOK HIS VIEWS AND SCREWED OVER ISRAEL AND JEWS.

I TOTALLY DISMISS THE ARGUMENT THAT HE SHOWS JEWS AS MORALLY SUPERIOR BECAUSE THEY DOUBT THEIR MISSION, AND THEY ARE CONCERNED ABOUT DUE PROCESS. FOCUS MORE ON THE POLICY IMPLICATIONS HERE. HE DEPICTS THE ALLEGED ISRAELI OFFENSIVE AGAINST THE ARCHITECTS OF THE MUNICH MASSACRE AS THE CATALYST FOR A GENERATION OF TERROR.

KUSHNER -- WHO WROTE THIS -- CALIBRATED THE SCRIPT TO PRESENT JUST ENOUGH 'BALANCE' TO FOOL SOME -- BUT ON THE KEY POINTS, THE IMPORTANT POINTS, IT'S AN ARABIST TRACT -- WITH PRECISELY THE POINTS NOW EMPHASIZED. THERE IS NOTHING MORE FUNDAMENTALLY WRONG THAN MORAL EQUIVALENCY, AND THAT'S A KEY MESSAGE HERE. AND, YES, IT IS AN ATTEMPT TO HUMANIZE. EVEN AT THE END OF THE MOVIE, THE POSTSCRIPT REFERS TO PALESTINIAN MEN -- IT DARE NOT USE THE WORD TERRORISTS OR MURDERERS, BECAUSE LEFTISTS DO NOT MAKE SUCH JUDGMENTS AND, MOREOVER, THIS MOVIE DEPICTED THE JEWS AS MURDERERS. AND IT'S HISTORICALLY OFF IN SO MANY WAYS. MEIR CORRECTLY FELT THAT RINGLEADERS HAD TO BEAR THE BURDEN OF TERRORISM, IT'S LIKE GOING AFTER MAFIA CHIEFS AND NOT THE YOUNG THUGS THEY ORDER AROUND.

I HAD HOPED FOR A MOVIE THAT WAS CREDIBLE BECAUSE IT SEEMED EVEN HANDED AND WAS NOT A BLATANT PRO-ISRAEL PROPAGANDA VEHICLE BUT THAT AT LEAST WAS NOT A TACIT ACCEPTANCE OF TERRORISM. BRIGHT AS SPIELBERG IS, HE IS SO FAR LEFT THAT HE PROBABLY DOESN'T EVEN GET WHAT KUSHER ACCOMPLISHED HERE. EVEN IN THE DEBATE IN THE MOVIE -- A REMARKABLY STAGED EVENT, THE PALESTINIAN GETS THE BEST OF THE ARGUMENT. AND THE LINE ABOUT THE JEWS TAKING IT BECAUSE NO ONE WOULD GIVE IT TO THEM LARGELY ACCEPTS THE ARAB ARGUMENT OF THEFT.