Wednesday, January 04, 2006


If counter-terror equals terror, then there can be no justice. This is a point that MOST observers of Spielberg's movie MUNICH seem to think he and his movie miss, a point which seems blatantly apparent to anyone who has read that Speilberg quote about how retaliation leads to a never-ending cycle of violence:
"a response to a response doesn't really solve anything. It just creates a perpetual-motion machine." He muses, "There's been a quagmire of blood for blood for many decades in that region. Where does it end? How can it end?"
That's a crock of morally relativist BS. If retaliation is wrong, then why abhor KKK lynchings, and seek justice against KKK murderers!? Why not just tell all victims of genocide to keep turning the cheek!?

YOU KNOW WHAT: if Black September had targeted GAYS, than anti-Semite Marxist and MUNICH screenwriter Kushner (who has publicly called the creation of the state of Isrsel a mistake) and morally relativist Spielberg would be ALL OVER the perps as heinous murderers - and then they'd portray them ACCURATELY. Without any moral relativism. They are SELECTIVELY MORALLY RELATIVIST - which means their pacifism is a phony facade. They're really merely Leftist elitists who LIKE to pick winners and losers. And if you're a member of a favorite/favored group of "VICTIMS," then they'll ENTITLE you to top-notch treatment.

We Israelis do not celebrate when we kill our enemies though our enemies celebrate when they kill us. Instead, it is a grim duty imposed on us by relentless racism and hate. ...

I was supposed to be with the 1972 Israeli Olympiads as a member of the Israeli women’s basketball team. At the last minute, the International Olympic Committee decided against including a women’s basketball event. (It did not become a regular event until the 1976 Olympics.)

I didn’t go to Munich, but I spent years training with the athletes who did go. We developed a close camaraderie, as people do at training camps where tensions and hopes are high. I knew each one of them personally. They were my friends. I watched in horror as the massacre unfolded on TV. I, too, could have been slaughtered by the killers linked to Yasser Arafat. Instead, I watched them slaughter my friends and saw how callously the world responded. The games went on even as my friends’ bodies were flown home draped not in medals but in burial shrouds.

I feared how Hollywood, even if it was Stephen Spielberg, would depict this tragedy but I finally went to see the film. Munich was worse than I had feared. It left me appalled and enraged. I felt violated. The film debased the memory of my friends. It exploited a horrifying atrocity. It slandered the brave Israeli volunteers who were ready to sacrifice their lives to seek justice and to risk orphaning their children in this dangerous but necessary assignment. Terrorists had to learn they could not murder Israelis abroad with impunity and that the perpetrators of this atrocity would not live to plot another one.

... A central theme is to make the audience believe that retributions against savage and barbaric slaughter do not deter terrorism. This concept is part of Leftist anti-war appeasement and a defeatist philosophy that blames victims of aggression.

But he offers no proof that this is true. The West made a major mistake in Munich when it appeased Hitler and failed to stop him before he became more powerful. We do not hear Spielberg argue for post-9/11 negotiations with Osama bin Laden. Spielberg, typical of so many “progressive” liberals, would like Israel to adopt his appeasement philosophy while he sits safely and comfortably thousands miles away in his Pacific Palisade mansion, far from danger.

The moral equivalence message is illustrated by a statement made by the Council of American-Islamic Relations, (CAIR), an anti-Israel organization which asserts moral equivalence between victims and terrorists. In a 12/26/05 FoxNews interview, CAIR spokesman, Ahmed Bedeir, had this to say:
"The viewers who see this movie will find that both sides are seeking and fighting for the same thing and have the same desires … which is a homeland. Ironically [they both have] similar motives and desires…. The only difference between what these so-called Mossad-sponsored assassins and other terrorists—they both use a similar means—they make bombs and they blow up people and they kill innocent civilians and, in the meantime, violence begets violence.
BOTTOM-LINE: Spielberg has made a movie CAIR loves. That says it all.


Anonymous said...


Why do a MAJORITY of US Jewish Voters cast their votes for the Democrat Party?

I don't get it, they seem to side with the party that would sell them down the river and have little respect for their situation surrounded by enemies in Israel.
In my view Conservatives want Israel to Kick Ass on the "Palistinians", construct a high/thick fence and not put up with any BS from their enemies.

Liberals seem to want to blame Israel and American Jews seem to love them.

... Confused.

Anonymous said...

the time is not far off...

spielberg is partially correct - retribution does not prevent crimes already committed- preemptive action does!

our enemies proclaim their intentions in their propaganda, and in their denial of historical fact.

we must kill the snake before it strikes us.

Reliapundit said...


i'm a jew.
i'm also a registered democrat.
tho' i have vited for GOP candidates - including Rudy and Bush in 2004.

david brooks wrote an article sometime back which used data which showed that party affiliaton is inherited, and as difficult for pople to change as their faith.

it becomes part of ons indentity.

as a result, MOST people ask "whaty does my party think?" or "what's my parety's position?" and do not come to an indepenmdent position at all.

and for most people this party affiliation trumps their PRIORITY LIST.

these liberal jews say "i'm a liveral dem; the GOP is the anti-Semitic party of 'White People' - i must vote dem." howard Dean said this - and he also said that Hamas is a political patty. And he is married to a jew.

(BTW: the GOP has jew as Chairman.)

anyhow... the way w get more Jews to vote their values and not their affiliation is to keep HAMMEING them - as I do all my jewish liberal friends.

I try to illustrate to them that the Left today is anti-Israel and anti-Semitic and that the Democat Paretyt is the home of the Left.

I also try to point oput to them that as a caucus, the Democats VOITE aganist Israel and jews more than the GOP. This is a fact.

Moran, McDermott and the Black Caucus ALWAYS vote against Israel. And then there is that Sewnate anti-iran resolution which the Democrats objected to. (It nbeeded unanimous consemt and so it failed.)

Well the NYTIMES won't report this so MANY MANY MANY Jews willnever find out about it. (They also refuse to read any other paper! - and so keep themselves misinformed!)

So it becomes our job.

it's touhg lonley work ion the trenches.

BTW: i repeat: i am still a registered Democrat - have been since 1974. MORE PROOF of how tough it is to change affiliation. Though at kleast I can support Bush and the GOP whem I think theyb are right. WHICH IS MLST OF THE TIME.

I feel that i can get through to more Dems by remaoning in the party.

I haven;t urrendeed the party yet to the McGovernite Anti-Sewmites.

Tho' maybe i should.

ANONYMOUS 548: you are so right!

IN FCAT: actual mossad agents ionvolved in the RETRIBUTION-assassinations against the Black September perps said that their targets WERE PLANNING other attacks, so in fact their assassinations WERE PREVENTATIVE!

Let's also never foprget thsat they are called Black September becasue of the FAILED attempt to OVERTHROW THE KING OF JORDAN - in september, and they lost and were kicked out and fled to lebanon which they promtly destroyd and plunged ionto a civil war which they are STILL trying to recover from.

when these same ISLAMOTHUGS returned to gaza and the west bank, they did the dame thing there. FACT: from 1967-1992 these "occupied territories" were among the FASTEST GROWING ECONOMIES INTHE WORLD.

that reversed as soon as ARAFAT returned.


prosperity was a result of peace and the arabs working in israel.

arafat was a criminal thug who ended real lliberty in the territories and skimmed all buisinesses for himself and hius corrut friends.and of course, their attacks on israel led israel to clamp down on trade/pali worker entering israel.

without that, there can be no economic growth.

islamofascism creates poverty.

Anonymous said...

Thanks Reliapundit!

I knew you were Jewish and I know your basic train of thought from being a fan of your blog.

I'm glad you explained this to me. And I think it's great that you combat Liberalism with the facts.

I also use to be a Democrat, but the party left me long ago.

Thanks for the info!

Anonymous said...

MOVIES,HBO and SHOW TIME: Hey Guys, I found a cool site that Saves me a bunch on Premium Movie Channels. Beats My Cable Hands Down, and it's ALL DIGITAL. Check this site out .**Movies**