So here we are!
Posted on 09/12/2006 9:30:29 PM PDT by the anti-liberal
The staging of pro-terrorist photos for the theater of jihad has been going on a long time.
I've blogged before about a notorious incident involving iconic images of a Palestinian boy, Mohammed al Doura, broadcast by French state-owned television in 2000. The boy was allegedly gunned down by Israeli soldiers. But as Nidra Poller and David Gelernter, among others, have reported, the truth was not on the terror sympathizers' side.
See also Pallywood and the investigation by Richard Landes here.
Now France-2 TV is suing critics of the Mohammed Dura video for defamation. The trial starts 9/14. Pesach Benson is blogging.
Pajamas Media is covering the trial, with exclusive reporting from Nidra Poller.
Richard Landes will also be trial-blogging at at Augean Stables.
And IHC writes:
Is it defamation to question the media? I would say that it’s downright irresponsible not to. But remember, this is 21st century France, and the Lady of the Republic has been raped, Lady Liberty’s in bondage, and Lady Justice has a migraine - as she’s been standing on her head for way too long.
But what is most difficult for a lot of us Anglos to understand, is that this is more about a French code of honor than anything else. People are being put on trial for expressing opinions that dishonor or embarrass France, as France 2 Television represents the French Republic. Forget the courts - this calls for a duel.
The Al-Dura trials begin this 14 September in Paris. The mainstream media may not deem the story fit for coverage (which in and of itself is intriguing and worthy of investigation), so I guess it’s up to us concerned and informed folks to push this issue into the headlines.
Perhaps it’s the public’s love affair with the macabre, and their lust for the sensational which enticed France 2 television to recklessly release footage reportedly depicting the shooting to death of a young boy, and the wounding of his father - at the hand of the Israelis (at least that’s what the voiceover said). In the rush to air 55 seconds of exclusive footage, which was rushed to France 2 by their Palestinian cameraman who filmed the scene; 27 minutes of rushes (unedited footage) were deliberately left on the editing room floor. France 2’s Charles Enderlin was so anxious to get the news out, that he generously distributed the 55 second clip free of charge to the global media.
Despite the incredible questions surrounding the case, France 2 has persistently refused to release the unseen footage to the general public. However, those few who have seen the footage report that it’s rather embarrassing, as it essentially records 24 minutes of youths feigning injuries, and ambulances evacuating the uninjured. ‘
This is not some over-the-top conspiracy we are dealing with. Highly regarded journalists and historians have gone out on a limb to question and probe the circumstances surrounding the case - the kind of people who can comfortably sip Chardonnay and discuss liberty, equality’, and brotherhood with top intellectuals in Paris - and they can do it in French (uh, let’s see... that would be liberté, egalité’, et fraternité). The kind of people who have Harvard, Princeton and Oxford under their belts and whose writings are published in the the Atlantic Monthly, Commentary Magazine, the Wall Street Journal, and respected academic periodicals.
But the mainstream, mediocre media just doesn’t want to go there. They’ve lost their ability for serious introspection, cutting edge journalism and investigative reporting. And why bother when, thanks to that very same media, so much of the public is dumbed down, passive and scandal-fatigued anyway?
Some argue that even if France 2 was negligent in handling the affair, why obsess over an event which happened six years ago. Leave it for the history books and get on with it already.
Except that it isn’t exactly history yet. At present, we’re still living, in realtime, the results of France 2’s rendering and editing of that footage. Inasmuch as there’s a surprising lack of blood in the footage, there’s been a staggering amount of blood spilled in this world in the name of Mohammed Al –Dura’s image...
...Whether we’re dealing with negligence, recklessness, or outright lies; the handling of the Al-Dura affair by France 2 was obscene, irresponsible and possibly devious. It must be taken seriously by the public.
Asking the right questions now and demanding valid answers may be the best way to avert further tragedy.
So here we are!
Ahem! We have rules here... Pictures Please.
Should be interesting to follow. However, I consider the father of fauxtography to be Stalin who indulged in now-you-see-him, now-you-don't airbrushing techniques to remove enemies of the people from state photos or to put himself in close proximity to Lenin before his death so he would appear to be Lenin's designated heir apparent. We have an entire book documenting those "omissions" and "additions" and it is fascinating to see politicians struggle to rewrite history to their advantage through airbrushing, staged photos or threats of pulling broadcast licenses. I guess the writer of Ecclesiastes was right when he wrote that there was nothing new under the sun.
Ah, The French press... Why does this not suprise me.
The anti-liberal,
That's a classic screen-name!
I'm not sure if you saw all the threads about manipulated photos during the Isreal/Lebanon conflict, but the freeper versions sure were funny. Some even had inserted the Katrina looter guy with the bucketful of beer in them.
Images from her site tend to do that. :^(
I bet they were a riot though!
I am in France and I can tell you that there is NO news about this trial in the press, on TV or on the radio. I did a French Google search for "procés - france 2 - Mohammed al Dura" and got one response from "La Libre Belgique".
Scary, isn't it?
We're lucky to have places like FR and Michelle Malkin to get the news the news won't report.
Yeah, Michelle Malkin sure is easy on the eyes, huh? It's just a shame that the Lefties that decide what is and isn't newsworthy will never do an in-depth report on the fauxtography, the faux videography and all the other staged events designed to turn the world opinion against Israel and the U.S. Even Fox News channel has drifted far enough leftward that they wouldn't dare spend an hour's worth of programming to run a special exposing the lies and deceit of organizations like al-Rueters, al-AP, al Jazeera (of course) and the alphabet networks here in the states. And don't get me started about all the "freelancers" throughout the middle east that get paid for each piece of filth they can get into the grubby hands of the anti-semitic int'l press whores. Good thing we have access to the web where the real news can get out to the people.
I would've thought Bill O'Reilly would've at least did a 'talking points memo' on it, that Brit Hume would've had at least one panel discussion on it, that John Gibson wouldn't at least mentioned it. And what about Sean Hannity - I'd have thought he would have at least argued about it with Alan Colmes.
I guess I'm really not missing much by tuning out am I?
Johnny on the spot ain't you, Ron you Dog...LOL
So now it's "Don't believe everything you see.".
http://edition.cnn.com/2000/US/12/25/photo.fakery/index.html
Interesting article.
Righto! Fascinating career this guy had. By the way, we have a WW2 surveillance camera but from Germany, not the U.S. The lens is Zeiss, the camera is about 12"x 15" x 10" and its supporting struts are about the size of a coffee table. Hubbie found it at a metal recycling plant near SFO years ago. Inspection dates indicate approximately when it was seized from the Germans. By the way, ever try decorating around such a contraption?
"Seeing is not believing"
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.