Saturday, December 24, 2005

Rabbi Marvin Hier On Munich

Hat tip to StandWithUs. In his article, Munich: The Missing Conversation, Rabbi Marvin Hier from the Simon Wiesenthal Center makes some excellent points about Spielberg's movie.

He talks about a conversation between the Israeli leader of the mission, Avner, and his handler, Ephraim, in which they discuss how Avner doesn't want to be a part of the 'cycle' any more.

He [Ephraim] could have started by reminding him what he said when he first sent him on his mission: “You are not terrorists throwing hand grenades at buses or machine-gunning people in the theater lobby.... There will be 11 [terrorist] names on your list. If you get only three, we will be disappointed, but you did nothing wrong. If you get no one, your mission would be a failure, but still you’ve done nothing wrong. If you get them all, but you also hurt one innocent person, you will have done wrong. Remember this.” (This is not in the film but appears in the book, “Vengeance,” on which "Munich” was based.)

This conversation is not in the film??? I guess SS didn't want to show any humanity in the Israelis. Unreal. Hier continues on this thread with another salient point.

I would have wanted to pursue the conversation further in light of what has happened since Munich, asking Avner, how should we confront terrorists? Should we wait for the U.N. General Assembly? You know how many times they have condemned Israel, but not a single time have they condemned a Palestinian terrorist organization?

If we didn’t go after the terrorists and their leaders, tens of thousands of civilians could be slaughtered. The late Golda Meir used to say that if that happened to Israel, she was sure that the eulogies would be profound, but she would prefer that the State of Israel live.

I'm with Golda. And Hier. But I guess that doesn't fit in with Spielberg's leftist fantasies. Hier knowingly points out that if daily terror attacks were happening in the US, France or England, we all know they wouldn't think twice about going after the terrorists. No kidding. I can't imagine that Spielberg would have a problem with that. Yet he and so many others begrudge little Israel from doing the same. Why do Jews have to roll over and take the punches? And why would Spielberg, who knows something about the phrase, "never again," expect or want them to do so? It doesn't make sense. Perhaps I'm expecting too much by thinking he should make sense. Hier realizes the frivolity of this expectation.

After the Holocaust, there are not that many Jews left in the world to sacrifice. I can’t wait for Islamic fundamentalist jihadists to begin treating Jews as human beings.

By the way, from what I know of the Bible, one never loses his righteousness by confronting evil. We learn that from Moses himself: “And Moses turned this way and that way [in our time, its meaning could be to the United Nations and to the European community], but he saw that there was no man, [no one was willing to confront the evil taskmaster] so he struck down the Egyptian....” (Exodus 2:12).

No one loses righteousness by confronting evil....exactly. And this is something the far left would be smart to realize as they try to handicap Israel and our own administration from doing everything they can to protect their people.


At 12:58 PM, Blogger beakerkin said...

I am going to see the film as drum master is draging me. If you see any entertainment types let them know this is my first film since Shrek 2. I was pushed into that as well.

At 2:32 PM, Blogger Mark said...

Beakerkin makes the ultimate sacrifice for us all! I suggest you post an in-depth review with no "spoiler" warning. The rest of us can link to it and spread the word.

Good article, excellent points. None of which is understood by the public at large that will see this movie as a factual account told by a Jew, no less.

At 5:47 PM, Anonymous Jake Porter said...

"Should we wait for the U.N. General Assembly? You know how many times they have condemned Israel, but not a single time have they condemned a Palestinian terrorist organization?"

I wouldn't trust the U.N. on anything. They are in my opinion a hatefull organization.

At 1:00 AM, Blogger Rory said...

I think Mark is right. This movie will gain undeserved credibility just by virtue of the fact that Spielberg is a Jew. But, the fact remains that he based this film on a largely discredited book. I actually read that the author, George Jonas, took a cab driver at his word that he had been the head of the Mossad operation, based on nothing more than the fact that the guy spoke with an Israeli accent. If that story is true (and what definitely is true is that this cab driver had no involvement with the operation whatsoever), then Steven Spielberg and this movie are both totally pathetic.

At 4:16 PM, Blogger Elmer's Brother said...

Michael Medved had a rabbi on his radio program who poked so mamy holes in the movie by going over the historical account. I lost all desire to see it at that point.

At 7:54 PM, Blogger Elmer's Brother said...

I found an interesting piece here

At 2:53 AM, Blogger beakerkin said...

I did see it and reviewed it on my site. The movie was a razor thin critique of the current war on terror. The absurd mention of treating the terrorist problem as a law enforcement issue and the rehash about the circle of violence were present.

Use your hard earned money on important things like houseplants or a decent cut of meat from the butcher.

At 7:05 PM, Blogger Mark said...

Thanks for taking that bullet for us, Beakerkin!

At 9:17 AM, Blogger Gindy said...

What do you think about Abe Foxman's comment about Munich? I was a little thrown off by him. He was on FOX with a CAIR spokesman and there was some agreement between the two (It was almost too much to bare).


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home