Following the Mohammad Al Dura case which was eventually found to be a staged "film" after going trough the courts for 7 years, one would have thought the media wold have learnt, - some hope!!
Lenny Ben-David (BlogCentral, http://tinyurl.com/28ghky9 ) comments on the latest Pallywood production "Palestinian Boy Hit By Israeli in Car in East Jerusalem", see View the Video (YouTube)
The film clip showing an Israeli car hitting two Arab children in Silwan on Friday was horrifying. No one can sit quietly and indifferently while children - any children - are hurt before your eyes. Thank God the children survived and were not seriously injured.
Then came the subtext: The children were part of a gang attacking the driver with rocks, and rocks can most definitely kill. (NOTE - the rear windows of the car had been smashed) The boys, emboldened by some militant organizer, covered their faces to avoid identification and arrest. There's no doubt of their intention and premeditation.
The driver was David Be'eri, a leader of the Jewish residents in Silwan. Be'eri's son was in the car.The story and YouTube clip spread around the world in nanoseconds. Arab witnesses charged that the "settler" deliberately ran down the children.But, I've now watched the clip scene-by-scene and in some parts frame-by-frame, and there's a deeper, even sinister, subtext. Most viewers focus on the victims. It's natural. They don't notice at least eight still photographers in addition to the video cameraman.
With the exception of one photographer standing across the street, all the others filmed the scene from the same vantage point at the bottom of the hill. There could have been more. The photographers cold be identified as:
1. Black baseball hat/gray hoodie with strap over shoulder.
2. White tee shirt and jeans across the street
3. Black shirt with gray stripes
4. Blonde woman
5. Green tee shirt
6. Striped polo shirt shows up once the boy's on the ground
7. Later a photographer with a long-sleeve gray shirt shows up riefly.
Many questions need to be asked.
Who invited them and coordinated the time and place?
Who recruited the boys? Did they plan to ambush dafka David Be'eri's car?
Was it an attempt to reenact the iconic death of Mohammed Dura, the boy allegedly killed by Israeli soldiers in 2000 in what we now know was a fake propaganda stage show?
Watch the clip and see how the photographers buzzed around the boy taking pictures while he was on the ground. Only one photographer went through the motion of extending a hand.
Was their sense of humanity suppressed by their hopes of a Pulitzer prize?Also watch as the wounded boy is manhandled and forcibly stuffed into a car against his will.
As a former medic, I was shocked and amazed that the boy survived the mistreatment he received after he was hit by the car. After such an initial trauma, first responders know that there is a likelihood of neck, head and spine injuries.
That was no way to evacuate a casualty, and if - or more likely when - the boy is presented before the press, the cause of his injuries should be judged accordingly.
Every photographer at the Silwan site bears responsibility for the children's injuries. They were tools in the hands of a dangerous propagandist, and they answered the summons to capture the "action" on film. Their presence incited the kids. Then the cameramen stood by as a child laid injured. Until the photographers fess up as to who dispatched them, they should be treated as accomplices to the crime of endangering the children.
Showing posts with label Mohammed Al Dura. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mohammed Al Dura. Show all posts
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
Thursday, May 22, 2008
Sensational Victory of Justice in Paris
The Verdict: Philippe Karsenty is 'Not Guilty'!
France-2’s Al-Dura movie may be rightly called “a total fake”, “totally staged”! Thus reports Endre Mozes of Take A Pen http://www.take-a-pen.org/english/Articles/Art21052008.htm present at the court hearing.
Was France-2's Al Dura movie a brave revelation of an Israeli brutality - or an irresponsible distribution of one more false Palestinian accusation of Israel with a murder it never committed; the most powerful blood libel of the 21st century?
For years the world believed to the short France-2 film as a revelation.
Now the Paris High Court of Justice acknowledges in its verdict the evidence collected by experts in all these years and allows calling the Palestinian-made France-2 film a "totally staged fake, a forgery". This is a breakthrough.
The most difficult question is now: will this truth spread in the world as widely as the libel did? The answer may have historical effects.
France-2 gave the video gratis to hundreds of TV stations and thus the story spread across the world like wildfire. The Al-Dura images, together with France2's accusation against Israel, became the most powerful icons of hatred in decades against Israel and the Jews. Hundreds of innocent people were killed in the upheavals incited, Jewish American-French journalist Daniel Pearl was beheaded live on video, as revenge for Al Durra.
Hundreds of millions of credulous honest people around the world also believed the accusation. A European Nobel laureate and many other famous intellectuals compared Israel to Nazi Germany, referring to the Al Dura tragedy.
The Al-Durra story had from the beginning all the ingredients of humankind's greatest epics: a tragic story, full of doubts and mysteries, may be not true at all, however influencing the life of masses of people and even mainstream history; beyond logic and beyond imagination.
In the course of time experts from the whole world built up evidence that this Al-Dura film was not authentic, but heavily edited, probably totally staged.
On November 14, 2007 the reason of France 2's obstinate secrecy became clear on the court's demand to see the raw footage. France2-selected 18 minutes-long part only of the known 27 minutes to be presented in the courtroom. The judges and we the audience in the small room couldn't see one single frame supporting France-2's Al-Dura film and years-long statements. Some omission, editing and staging became absolutely obvious.
The day of the verdict, 21 May 2008 came after eight years of growing doubts and after four years of legal fight in Paris courts between the giant France 2 state television and young journalist Philippe Karsenty.
The verdict had been anticipated in huge tension, but today Charles Enderlin and France-2 were absent. They obviously knew they had lost the case. Enderlin, in the last year, has lost much of his previous great prestige as a reliable expert on Palestinian and Israeli matters and become perceived to be, in the best case, a credulous victim of a Palestinian fraud. Naturally, the defendant, Philippe Karsenty and many others were there also experts and media activists who had contributed to revealing the truth, and citizens from all over Europe, the US and Israel who came to Paris to watch the court proceedings and today’s verdict from up close.
The Verdict: On 21st May, 2008, at 1:55 P.M. the panel of judges of the Paris Court of Appeal, presided by Judge Ms. Laurence Trebucq, rendered the short verdict that:
- Philippe Karsenty is NOT GUILTY.
The consequences of this decision are :-
a) that Karsenty’s harsh criticism of France 2’s film in 2004 that the film was a 'fake', a 'forgery', 'totally staged' – has not been libelous, but legitimate.
b) This also means that the court recognized that the Al-Dura story, the 21st century’s most devastating media campaign against Israel, using the heart-breaking image of the frightened and, as if, dying 12-year old boy – based solely on a heavily edited film and testimony of one Palestinian cameraman Talal Abu Rahme, the sole eye-witness, is not a reliable source.
c) An important detail is that in the full judgment document (not read in the court and to be published only later) the court accepted the argumentation of Karsenty's lawyer that journalistic productions made under totalitarian regimes, like Hamas, where people are regularly killed in short street tribunals for their views, are inherently less reliable and must be scrutinized before accepted as proofs.
d) This verdict means, most importantly, that Israel is not guilty, again, as proven 1) in the Jenin accusations, 2) in the staged libel of the Gaza-beach tragedy, 3) in the 'apartheid wall' fabrications, and 4) in many other co-productions of Pallywood, the Palestinian news industry and some greedy Western media.
e) And this verdict means that France-2 and Charles Enderlin ARE GUILTY; at least of negligence, of distributing such a capital accusation without due or even minimum checking. Later, when the fraud became growingly obvious, France-2 of Director Arlette Chabot added insult to injury by suing the critics and keeping the evidence, the raw footage, hidden so long. This was certainly not a mistake already but arrogance of a monopolistic state TV.
The future? In Paris, the city where Captain Dreyfuss was unjustly sentenced twice and rehabilitated much later, TV France 2 may also become from the accuser of yesterday to the accused libelous party tomorrow; for disseminating its fake Muhammad Al-Durrah movie and unfounded libelous accusations without due diligence done.
Most important and urgent now is the dissemination of the truth revealed about the Al Dura forgery. If mainstream media won't do this willingly, we all who know now the truth have to urge them to do so.
The media have to correct their literally lethal libelous mistakes and rebuild their morality. The remaining most important question now is: will this truth spread in the world as widely as the libel did? The answer may have historical effects
France-2’s Al-Dura movie may be rightly called “a total fake”, “totally staged”! Thus reports Endre Mozes of Take A Pen http://www.take-a-pen.org/english/Articles/Art21052008.htm present at the court hearing.
Was France-2's Al Dura movie a brave revelation of an Israeli brutality - or an irresponsible distribution of one more false Palestinian accusation of Israel with a murder it never committed; the most powerful blood libel of the 21st century?
For years the world believed to the short France-2 film as a revelation.
Now the Paris High Court of Justice acknowledges in its verdict the evidence collected by experts in all these years and allows calling the Palestinian-made France-2 film a "totally staged fake, a forgery". This is a breakthrough.
The most difficult question is now: will this truth spread in the world as widely as the libel did? The answer may have historical effects.
France-2 gave the video gratis to hundreds of TV stations and thus the story spread across the world like wildfire. The Al-Dura images, together with France2's accusation against Israel, became the most powerful icons of hatred in decades against Israel and the Jews. Hundreds of innocent people were killed in the upheavals incited, Jewish American-French journalist Daniel Pearl was beheaded live on video, as revenge for Al Durra.
Hundreds of millions of credulous honest people around the world also believed the accusation. A European Nobel laureate and many other famous intellectuals compared Israel to Nazi Germany, referring to the Al Dura tragedy.
The Al-Durra story had from the beginning all the ingredients of humankind's greatest epics: a tragic story, full of doubts and mysteries, may be not true at all, however influencing the life of masses of people and even mainstream history; beyond logic and beyond imagination.
In the course of time experts from the whole world built up evidence that this Al-Dura film was not authentic, but heavily edited, probably totally staged.
On November 14, 2007 the reason of France 2's obstinate secrecy became clear on the court's demand to see the raw footage. France2-selected 18 minutes-long part only of the known 27 minutes to be presented in the courtroom. The judges and we the audience in the small room couldn't see one single frame supporting France-2's Al-Dura film and years-long statements. Some omission, editing and staging became absolutely obvious.
The day of the verdict, 21 May 2008 came after eight years of growing doubts and after four years of legal fight in Paris courts between the giant France 2 state television and young journalist Philippe Karsenty.
The verdict had been anticipated in huge tension, but today Charles Enderlin and France-2 were absent. They obviously knew they had lost the case. Enderlin, in the last year, has lost much of his previous great prestige as a reliable expert on Palestinian and Israeli matters and become perceived to be, in the best case, a credulous victim of a Palestinian fraud. Naturally, the defendant, Philippe Karsenty and many others were there also experts and media activists who had contributed to revealing the truth, and citizens from all over Europe, the US and Israel who came to Paris to watch the court proceedings and today’s verdict from up close.
The Verdict: On 21st May, 2008, at 1:55 P.M. the panel of judges of the Paris Court of Appeal, presided by Judge Ms. Laurence Trebucq, rendered the short verdict that:
- Philippe Karsenty is NOT GUILTY.
The consequences of this decision are :-
a) that Karsenty’s harsh criticism of France 2’s film in 2004 that the film was a 'fake', a 'forgery', 'totally staged' – has not been libelous, but legitimate.
b) This also means that the court recognized that the Al-Dura story, the 21st century’s most devastating media campaign against Israel, using the heart-breaking image of the frightened and, as if, dying 12-year old boy – based solely on a heavily edited film and testimony of one Palestinian cameraman Talal Abu Rahme, the sole eye-witness, is not a reliable source.
c) An important detail is that in the full judgment document (not read in the court and to be published only later) the court accepted the argumentation of Karsenty's lawyer that journalistic productions made under totalitarian regimes, like Hamas, where people are regularly killed in short street tribunals for their views, are inherently less reliable and must be scrutinized before accepted as proofs.
d) This verdict means, most importantly, that Israel is not guilty, again, as proven 1) in the Jenin accusations, 2) in the staged libel of the Gaza-beach tragedy, 3) in the 'apartheid wall' fabrications, and 4) in many other co-productions of Pallywood, the Palestinian news industry and some greedy Western media.
e) And this verdict means that France-2 and Charles Enderlin ARE GUILTY; at least of negligence, of distributing such a capital accusation without due or even minimum checking. Later, when the fraud became growingly obvious, France-2 of Director Arlette Chabot added insult to injury by suing the critics and keeping the evidence, the raw footage, hidden so long. This was certainly not a mistake already but arrogance of a monopolistic state TV.
The future? In Paris, the city where Captain Dreyfuss was unjustly sentenced twice and rehabilitated much later, TV France 2 may also become from the accuser of yesterday to the accused libelous party tomorrow; for disseminating its fake Muhammad Al-Durrah movie and unfounded libelous accusations without due diligence done.
Most important and urgent now is the dissemination of the truth revealed about the Al Dura forgery. If mainstream media won't do this willingly, we all who know now the truth have to urge them to do so.
The media have to correct their literally lethal libelous mistakes and rebuild their morality. The remaining most important question now is: will this truth spread in the world as widely as the libel did? The answer may have historical effects
Thursday, November 15, 2007
Mohammed Al Dura tapes from France 2
Finally France 2 has produced some 18 mins of the tapes of the Mohammed Al Dura incident out of the 27 mins they pocess.
See the reactions of some of those present at the hearing in the video clip below
I don't think any further comment is nessary
See the reactions of some of those present at the hearing in the video clip below
I don't think any further comment is nessary
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)