Tue Jan 14 02:30:00 UTC 2025: ## Commentary Magazine: Backlash Against Film Depicting 1972 Munich Olympics Massacre Highlights Absurdity of Anti-Israel Sentiment
**New York, NY** – A new film, “September 5,” depicting the live television coverage of the 1972 Munich Olympics massacre, has sparked a furious backlash from pro-Palestinian activists, highlighting the increasingly absurd tactics employed to silence narratives unfavorable to their cause. The film, which utilizes the actual live broadcast footage of the terrorist attack, has been accused of being “Zionist propaganda” and “profiting off the genocide of Palestine.”
The controversy began when the Alamo Drafthouse cinema chain in Brooklyn began showing the film. Employees, organized under their union, launched a petition demanding the film’s removal, claiming it depicts Arabs as “evil, antisemitic terrorists” and promotes a Western imperialist agenda. The petition further alleges the film ignores the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
The author of a Commentary magazine article counters these claims, arguing that the film depicts actual historical events and that the accusations are unfounded. He points out that the film focuses on the broadcast coverage itself, documenting the real-time reactions to the terrorist attack carried out by Palestinian terrorists. The author suggests that the criticism stems from the fact that reality contradicts the modern left’s anti-Zionist narrative.
The controversy extends beyond the Alamo Drafthouse. The Toronto International Film Festival reportedly rejected the film, fearing a backlash, despite its potential for awards consideration. This, according to the article, illustrates a wider trend in the entertainment industry to avoid films featuring Israeli Jews, for fear of provoking controversy.
The author concludes that the over-the-top nature of the backlash against “September 5” could inadvertently delegitimize the entire outrage industry, offering a glimmer of hope for the future of art and free speech. The article ultimately serves as a commentary on the increasingly unreasonable tactics employed to suppress narratives challenging established anti-Israel viewpoints.
First Piper 