From more reliable sources, the first assassination was cased by a team of about a dozen, with two Mossad agents flown in for a day for the killing, using silenced .22s. I am reading "Vengeance" by George Jonas, the book that "Munich" is ostensibly based upon.
This is a serious question: isn't that a reliable source?
From everything I've read, no. As I understand it, his primary Mossad "source" turned out to be an El Al security guard, discovered after the publication. A couple links to reviews of the Klein book, which appears to be far better researched. Klein is ex-Israeli intelligence, now Time's military affairs correspondent in the region. Timing is coincidental, though the book release was pushed up due to the movie. I've heard Klein interviewed several times, and his conclusions are radically different. From the missions objective, which was killing terrorists who presented future threats, not Munich participants, to the purported misgivings of the participants, which he contends is a complete fabrication.
Aaron Klein Discusses 'Striking Back,' A Look At The Munich Killings, Aftermath
'Munich' distorts history-Michael Medved
New Book Takes Issue With Spielberg's 'Munich'
Rival tome snipes at 'Munich' 'Striking Back' says 'Vengeance' botches history
Coming down firmly on both sides
It was an entertaining movie, a bit slow, but appears not to be historical. Other than the actual Olympics coverage, which Klein says was essentially as accurate as you'd expect in a movie.
BTW, I hadn't noticed the weapon in the first killing, but the 92 hadn't been released till the mid 70s, though I suppose the Mossad could have acquired a prototype if they'd wanted.
I'm not a big fan of Wikipedia, but their short bio of
Yuval Aviv seems to be accurate. He was Jonas's source for Vengence, and said to be the
model for the Avner character who most Israeli sources contend is purely fictional.