I haven't seen the movie yet, so I'd like instead to comment on the reviewer.

Ms. Zacharek says "'Spider-Man 3' is the most ambitious and complex Spider-Man movie yet. Its multiple plots wave themselves around, defiantly declaring their unmanageability like Doc Ock's tentacles..."

This is a nice contrast from all the other critics who have pronounced themselves confused and bewildered by the multiple plot streams, and so they hate the movie.

I like to read reviews by people who "get" that genre of movie. Ms. Zacharek "gets" the comic book movies and similar melodramas. I can't judge how she does on the prissy art-house movies that Salon sophisticates groove on - because I'm not a sophisticate myself - so I won't say anything about that, either.

Arlo Figg sez "The Israeli Nation should be transported lock stock and barrel to somewhere in the American West, where a new Israeli state could be created far away from the present disaster that's the Middle East."

Yes, because nobody lives here in the West. No Native Americans, no welfare ranchers, no 500-year old villages where the people still speak sixteenth-century Spanish, no cities, no suburbs, ... Well, you get the point.

What kind of future disaster might result from transplanting Israelis, settler-types and all, to some corner of the United States? Would they continue their expansionist tradition? Would they set themselves up as a proudly isolated conclave, dare I say 'ghetto'? Would they insist on their own military, as well-equipped as ours? Would we continue giving them $4B/year in aid?

Would populated areas be proudly bulldozed as "land without people for people without land"? Would ever-increasing acreage be seized at gunpoint? What about the floods of Katrina-style refugees - Americans all - from the Israeli zone? Would the United States finally have some kind of grounds for anti-Semitism?

Just asking. Methinks it makes better 'alternate history' than 'reality.'

Come on, Mr. Sugarman - "nobody needs grounds"? That's an oxymoron.

Most of today's so-called "anti-Semitism" is actually anti-Likudism. The same Arabs who were fine with Jews for a couple thousand years, lived side by side with them, and in many documented instances, actually helped to shelter them from the Nazis, are reacting to the Israeli government's treatment of the displaced Palestinian peoples.

I know you don't believe there are any Palestinian people, now or ever, and that the Europeans who moved into the holy land did no wrong; in fact, could do no wrong.

But many others in that part of the world believe otherwise, and have relatives who confirm their beliefs that these things have occurred.

And that's "grounds."

You, and others, call it "anti-Semitism." I think you're slandering the Jews.

Mr. Sugarman, Mr. Name - time to turn in and get some rest. When you get up tomorrow, re-read your posts.

You're raving.

I'm sure that, person to person, you're nice men. It's just that now, you're not even making any sense. Call it a night.

Providing the Iraqi military with medical care was apparently not on the agenda, even though they were given the responsibility to "stand up" so the US military could "stand down."

It's easy to look upon this as sheer, Katrina-style incompetence. It's equally likely to be ideological, part of a "market-based" philosophy. You see, if you flood the market with injured people in desperate need of care, doctors and hospitals will blossom all over Iraq, and provide competitive, cost-effective care. No need for that socialistic, government-provided military hospital system.

Besides, Santa Claus will be showing up in several months, so what's everyone worrying about?

The biggest strength of financial reporting is its accuracy, because it's about money. When Mr. Murdock changes the accurate, reality-based reporting of the Wall Street Journal to partisan spin, investors and big money-people are going to object. They won't be getting the facts they need to make money.

Throughout the 1990s and following Bush Era, I've noticed that, even in my small-town paper, the financial pages gave the most accurate information on what was really going on. Regardless of the spin on Page 1, you'd find out the real dirt on what corporations were doing, and how it related to the political news, on the Business page. That's because it was about money.

Serious people will be dropping the Wall Street Journal once Mr. Murdock changes the news to the all-partisan rag. Murdock's got enough money that this shouldn't stop him; he'll make content free on the Web, perhaps, to get more readers. He'll wring the reputation and name-recognition factor dry, but in the end, nobody with a clue will be reading the WSJ anymore.

There was a Coldstone Creamery just down the street from where I live. I went there once, and can vouch for everything Mr. Peters has to say about the experience. Plus, CC didn't even sell beverages! No Diet Coke to help wash down your gloppy humongous! Not even a bottled water or Dr. Pepper or 100% juice, in case you wanted to accompany someone who did want to get ice cream.

The Coldstone Creamery is now gone, replaced by a Ben & Jerry's.