MUNICH, Black September, & CIA money

[yurbud]

I just saw MUNICH and an almost throw away detail someone mentioned at one point was that the CIA gave money to Black September, the group that did the Munich massacre,though they made a point of saying it was AFTER that, and the money was to protect American diplomats from being targets.

Anyway hear anything about this?

Is there any extremist group we haven't funded or done backdoor deals with?

[mikelewis]

1. The Quakers

[derby378]

6. You forgot the "Sarcasm" smiley...

Then again, we do pose a threat, don't we? What with our "speaking truth to power" and all that.

[Wickerman]

2. Just got home from same

and wondered myself if there are any pies that we don't/haven't had our thumbs in.

good flick, too long and too bloody, though, imho

[Clara T]

3. Interesting Read Here

http://www.specialoperations.com/Counterterrorism/munich_ct.htm

[liberalpragmatist]

4. Keep in mind that the film is largely fiction

I thought it was a great film, personally. But the general storyline is almost completely made up. The Munich massacre was depicted realistically, as were the assassinations of the alleged terrorists in the film. The terrorists that were killed were real people.

However, in real life, almost none of the men by the Mossad were actually associated with the attacks, a point that Spielberg hints at but makes ambiguous. And most historians and experts on Mossad operations have said that much of the film is fanciful. The targets were not on any list, but were simply targets identified by the Mossad and other foreign intelligence agencies through informers and their own networks. The cabinet voted on whether to kill or not, then instructions were then given to Mossad teams of trained assassins. The shadowy private French network that Avner's team gets information from is probably fiction as well. So the question of whether the US paid money to Black September could well just be a made up point in the story.

That being said, the US has given lots of money to terrorists and extremists over the years, so it's plausible.

[yurbud]

5. it seemed like they tried to be faithful on the background info when

possible.

[1932]

7. It's based on a book by an anonymous (alleged) ex-Mossad agent.

Right?

Since he won't say who he is, it's impossible to confirm that he had insider knowlede of the events.

I think that's what I read.