Pave: "It's A Cultural Style" Redux

Le jour 129 de Sarko

When one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it.

Joseph Goebbels,
Reichsminister für Volksaufklärung und Propaganda
January 12, 1941 (Die Zeit ohne Beispiel)

One of the bigger lies of French broadcasting* is about to become unstuck.

AL-DURA FOOTAGE TO AIR
French Judge Orders Television Network To Screen Withheld Footage
Of Killing Of Young Palestinian Boy In Gaza In 2000

September 20, 2007 (Ynet) - A French judge has ordered the France 2 television network to screen in court previously withheld footage of the shooting of Muhammad al-Dura, the Palestinian boy shot dead in his father's arms in Netzarim in 2000 during a battle between Palestinian gunmen and IDF soldiers. [In its original broadcast, Fr2 reported the IDF as the responsible shooter.]

... Philipe Karsenty, head of the French media watchdog Media-Ratings, is behind the legal petition calling on France 2 to release the raw footage from that day. M. Karsenty:

[This is] a first step towards a final victory which will lead French authorities to admit they broadcast a huge, anti-Semitic lie, used to justify the killing of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl.

This film has been seen all over the Arab world. Schools carry the name of al-Dura, and children are taught that Israelis kill for no reason. So while you cannot resurrect people who died because of this lie, you can avoid more people dying.

France 2 is owned by the French state, which is headed by Sarkozy. He has the power to ask for those images, and have them scrutinized by experts around the world. I now call on Sarkozy to ask for the footage... it's time for French president to tell the truth.

Last year similar claims by M. Karsenty were ruled defamatory** and he was ordered to pay a fine of €1000, damages of €1 to each of the plaintiffs, Charles Enderlin and Fr2, plus €3000 of legal expenses.

Charles Enderlin, Jerusalem bureau chief of France 2, provided rolling commentary on the footage back in 2000.

M. Enderlin was not a witness to the shooting. He oversaw the editing of the footage*** and reported as fact his own conclusion that the IDF was the responsible shooter -- a conclusion not suported by peer reviews arranged by Fr2.

Reacting to Wednesday's court ruling Enderlin told Ynetnews he welcomed the decision.

I am very happy about this decision. From the start, our position has been that we will not release raw footage except through a judicial process. We will not release the footage to militants or private individuals.

I'm very happy that it will be seen in court. I hope that this is the end of a smear campaign which has gone on for seven years, and which has been difficult for me and my family.

People have accused us of staging an event which is an absolute lie. I am very happy at last to have the possibility (to show it).

[Emphases added.]

Why is M. Enderlin so very happy? What news organization seeks out a court order for the disposition of its editorial property? If Fr2 was looking for a court venue to release its footage, why didn't it do so last year when it was in court suing M. Karsenty? Or Pierre Lurçat, or Charles Gouz? Fr2 never resorted to the unreleased footage to prosecute its defamation suits, which strongly suggests that this determinative footage does not support Fr2's claims. And just what is the magic of releasing this footage through the courts?

No one has accused Fr2 of staging an event. Fr2 is accused of misreporting (e.g., Stephane Juffa: "serious professional errors in the Al Dura affair", "serious presumptions of misinformation").

Fr2 in the person of M. Enderlin has crafted a report that is factually controversial. The footage on the cutting room floor (scil., unreleased footage) will quickly establish many of the facts in dispute. Yet, Fr2, a news organization, fights to suppress the news.

Here are the questions to ask:

If the story is in fact as Fr2 has reported it, how can the unreleased footage fail to support the story?

If the unreleased footage supports the story, why has Fr2 resisted its release?

M. Enderlin has enfeebled his big lie by telling several little lies.

------------------------------------
* Some other whoppers here and here and here, to link but three.

** So ruled despite the recommendation of the Procureur de la République that all charges against M. Karsenty be dismissed.

*** Damningly, M. Enderlin claimed to have edited out the actual death of Muhammad al-Dura because it was "unbearable". Several independent journalists, who screened the entire footage at the invitation of Fr2, have established that no such "unbearable" footage exists.

PFFT (What is this?): Unstuck 4 | No views but the state news 4 | Rayonnement français ½