Posted on 05/21/2008 8:51:34 AM PDT by ScaniaBoy
AL DURA UPDATE: "Israel Radio's Paris correspondent Gil Michaeli has just reported that the French Court of Appeals has overturned the libel judgment against Phillipe Karsenty and has determined that Karsenty did not libel France 2 correspondent Charles Enderlin when he reported that the 'death' of 12-year old Mohamed Al-Dura at Netzarim in the Gaza Strip in September 2000 may have been staged, and that it was unlikely that the death was caused by IDF soldiers." Perhaps the Israeli military should start filing foreign libel suits against media outfits that collaborate in fake reporting. There's likely enough to keep quite a few lawyers busy . . . .
This story of the young boy shot by Israeli soldiers while covering behind his father was one of the sparks that set of the bloody second intifada. Many years later, after thousands of deaths, it is now obvious even to the French courts that France 2 used faked material to make this story - that never was. If the boy al-Dura, was killed by anyone then it certainly was not by Israeli soldiers.
Very interesting to see if NYT, LAT , WaPo etc will carry this story on their frontpages. I will not hold my breath in anticiaption.
PING!
Oh wow. Let me contact Philippe and see what he has to say about this!
From your mouth, to Allah's ear, as the saying goes...
I can’t take credit for that idea.........but I like it!
More fake “news” exposed — this calls for an investigation by Dan Rather!
I’m sure that this decision will never get even a small fraction of the attention that the original hysterical Pali-propaganda received.
Warning! This is a high-volume ping list.
This is Philippe in the middle.
So far nothing on the web pages of Le Figaro, Le Monde or Le Parisien.
Maybe they are waiting for the court’s written opinion. /sarcasm
Just damn.
So many people just do not understand what we are up against.
Please, relay our congratulations!
And of course post any news you hear from Paris.
thanks. bkmark
As usual it will be up to the bloggers. Hopefully this story will be all over the net in no time.
We all know the answer. Why should I even ask......
Court overturns al-Dura libel judgment
Excerpts:
The French Court of Appeals on Wednesday found in favor of Jewish activist Philippe Karsenty, overturning a lower court decision that he had libeled France 2 and its Jerusalem correspondent Charles Enderlin when he accused them of knowingly misleading the watching world about the death of the Palestinian child Mohammed al-Dura in the Gaza Strip in 2000.
"The verdict means we have the right to say France 2 broadcast a fake news report, that [al-Dura's shooting] was a staged hoax and that they duped everybody - without being sued," Karsenty told The Jerusalem Post shortly after the verdict was issued at 1:30 p.m. Paris time.
and:
A statement forwarded to The Jerusalem Post from Enderlin said that "the appeals court ruled that Karsenty's words were, in fact, libelous, and that Karsenty failed to prove that the news was staged and/or false." The statement added that the case was nevertheless overturned because "the court believed Karsenty had the right to stridently criticize the [France 2] report, since it dealt with an emotional topic, and that Karsenty's investigation into the matter convinced the court he was bring sincere."
A source close to Enderlin's side of the case explained that "you can get out of a libel suit either by proving you're right, or by showing you were sincere and had some research. The court found the latter to be the case."
The source also said Enderlin and France 2 would appeal the verdict, noting that they had won three out of four instances of judgment in the matter.
[Note to Enderlin: Court cases are not football games.]
But, replied Karsenty, the only appeal left would be to France's Supreme Court.
"If they continue to insist they are correct," added Karsenty, "we will have victims of terror attacks that directly resulted from the [al-Dura] footage sue France 2."
Karsenty also called on French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who Karsenty sees as "ultimately responsible" for the publicly owned television station, "to take responsibility for the French state's defense of the worst anti-Semitic lie around. It's time to apologize to the world for broadcasting a fake news report that has inflamed the Muslim world and endangered world peace."
French court: Claim that Al-Dura tape doctored isn`t libelous
A French appeals court on Wednesday overturned a libel verdict won by France 2 television over a report about the killing of a Palestinian boy in 2000.
The Paris court ruled in favor of media critic Philippe Karsenty, who called into question the veracity of the report, but it also said that it did not rule out that journalists at France 2 had acted professionally.
High volume. Articles on Israel can also be found by clicking on the Topic or Keyword Israel, WOT
..................
It’s about time Israel fought back in the PR war! They’ve been staying out of it long enough.
Is that a cheap shot at Sarkozy? Make the 'journalists' apologize on the publicly owned station.
No, it is is not a cheap shot directed at Sarkozy. But it is quite self-evident that the ultimate responsibility for a state run TV-channel lies with the state, and the Sarkozy is the head of state.
The journalists will never apologize, but they should be kicked out.
Thanks Fred Nerks.
Thanks C from E and FN. :’)
Just call Al-Dura to testify. I heard he’s not really dead.
Thanks.
Last I’d seen Enderlin had edited the original footage he was ordered to produce. Don’t they have contempt of court in France? Enderlin is sure contemptible in my book.
WSJ has a very interesting editorial about the reaction of French media to this court ruling. Just like American media = dead silence when news is unfavorable to their “world view.”
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121183795208620963.html?mod=opinion_main_commentaries
A Hoax?
By NIDRA POLLER
FROM TODAY’S WALL STREET JOURNAL EUROPE
May 27, 2008
-—snip-—
The landmark ruling closes with an eloquent affirmation of the right of citizens to criticize the press freely, the right of the public to be informed honestly and seriously, the right of expression guaranteed by Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, a right that applies not only to inoffensive ideas but also to those that are shocking, disturbing, troubling.
The media that dramatically reported the killing of Mohammed al-Durra are deathly silent today. They didn’t inform the public about the ongoing controversy, didn’t attend the trials and have apparently decided to place this story into an artificial coma. As if this judgment against a colleague who placed blind trust in his Palestinian cameraman and, when called to clarify his report, attacked the questioner instead of questioning his own competence were not newsworthy?
The press corps has consistently closed ranks with Charles Enderlin. One week before the verdict was announced, pay-to-view TV station Canal+ aired a documentary seemingly concocted for the purpose of branding Philippe Karsenty — and anyone who challenged the al-Durra story — as conspiracy-theory crackpots.
Mr. Enderlin is the dean of French Middle East reporting. On France 2, he has full latitude to present his editorializing as factual news. Pointedly ignoring the al-Durra controversy, France 2 continued to give Mr. Enderlin — in tandem with cameraman Talal Abu Rahma — high-profile status on primetime news. Every few years Mr. Enderlin collects his material into another “authoritative” book on the Arab-Israeli conflict. Mr. Enderlin has been the driving force in convincing French public opinion that Israel was to blame for the breakdown of the July 2000 Camp David talks. Further, Mr. Enderlin argues that the “Al Aqsa” or second intifada turned violent because of the disproportionate repression of civilian protest by uncontrolled Israeli military personnel.
Mr. Enderlin claims ultra-Zionist Likudniks want to prevent him from reporting objectively on the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is now replaying the Karsenty case on his French state-TV blog where, in the absence of the wise Judge Trébucq, he wins hands down. He claims the al-Durra controversy was fomented in response to the publication of “Le Rêve Brisée” (Shattered Dreams), where he pinpointed Israel’s responsibility for the collapse of the peace process. (http://blog.france3.fr/charles-enderlin/index.php/2008/05/25/72983-quelques-verites-sur-la-campagne-de-desinformation-et-de-diffamation-contre-france-2-et-moi-meme)
France Télévisions director Patrick de Carolis and the CSA — roughly equivalent to the U.S. Federal Communications Commission — have been repeatedly called by media watchdogs to intervene in the al-Durra controversy. Can they all remain deaf to the wisdom of a courageous judge who has reasserted the journalist’s responsibility to serve the people and account for the way he does his job?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.