News Blackout – New York Times Ignores Momentous Pro-Jewish Court Case Win in France
Posted on July 14, 2008
-By Warner Todd Huston
French media loses big court case proving Palestinian propaganda false, New York Times ignores shocking story… Why?
France TV 2 has lost a major court case in France that makes the lie to a major piece of Palestinian propaganda. In 2000 an incident occurred in the Palestinian areas that has since been used as propaganda for the Palestinian cause all across the world and the New York Times has repeatedly been a willing host for this propaganda. Now, however, it has been proven that France 2 perpetrated a lie that has given succor to terrorism. And where is the New York Times with this momentous news that proves Israeli innocence? Nowhere to be seen.
In 2000 the Palestinians began what they called the second intifada against Israel, a kick in the teeth to the Israelis seeking only peace. During the early stages of this attack France 2 TV, a state run television station, aired what it claimed was a video of a child and his father being shot and killed by Israeli security forces.
Palestinian sources claimed that what France 2 TV showed the French public and the world was the death of 12-year-old Muhammad al-Dura and his father, killed by Israeli security forces. The shock of this small boy being mercilessly shot down by Jews drew condemnation like a lightening rod. Supporters of Palestine the world over were outraged, posters appeared, protests were whipped up, postage stamps with the image of this child’s supposed last minutes on Earth were even created in Egypt and Tunisia. The “death” of Muhammad al-Dura rallied support to Palestinians against the Jews. And for the last 8 years the New York Times has been right there with the “news” pushing the story for all its worth.
In 2002, for instance, a Times story told of how little Muhammad al-Dura was a “12-year-old boy from Gaza whose father could not shield him from a hail of Israeli gunfire.” In 2000 a Times story told us of frightened Gazan Raji Sourani, director of the Palestinian Center for Human Rights, who told a pitiful story of the fear of his own children based on the “death” of little al-Dura.
”Like every child here, they are haunted by the image of Muhammad al-Dura,” he continued, referring to the 12-year-old boy shot dead as he crouched behind his father — film that is repeatedly shown on Palestinian and Arab television stations. ”I have never had a gun in my life. But my children — who are doing pee-pee in their beds — want me to buy one, because obviously Muhammad al-Dura’s father couldn’t protect him well enough with his bare hands.”
The New York Times has been at the forefront of allowing Palestinians and their sympathizers use the al-Dura tale as propaganda to further Palestinian interests. Dutifully, maybe even with relish, the Times has recorded how this image has been a rallying point for supporters of the Palestinians against the Jews.
There was a problem, however, with this little tale. The film showing the death of little Muhammad al-Dura didn’t seem exactly right to some folks in France, in particular a bulldog journalist named Philippe Karsenty (among others). Mr. Karsenty didn’t think things seemed right with the claim that it was Israeli bullets that struck the boy and his father. It seemed to Mr. Karsenty that the trajectory was wrong for bullets to be coming from where the Israeli forces were firing. Then he noticed that, despite the fact that the boy and his father were supposedly shot to death, no blood appears anywhere on the video of the “shooting.” Not on the walls where bullets seemed to splatter, nor on the pavement under the prone, supposedly dead, figures of the two. Philippe Karsenty felt that the whole thing was a Palestinian fake and he began to agitate for the truth.
France 2 TV, however, not only denied any such possibility, but refused to show the world all the video before and after the supposed shooting that might clear the matter up and prove one way or the other. Philippe Karsenty continued agitating and writing excoriating France 2 TV for its obstinacy until the TV station decided to take him to court for “libel.”
In 2005, the New York Times published a story detailing the case against France 2 TV. It seems to me that this is the only story that the Times published about the questions over the authenticity of the al-Dura video. I have searched the Times archives and found but this one story.
Well, it is now 2008 and the French court case is over and it is a stunning result. Mr. Karsenty won. The case of libel was thrown out. This is a stunning victory because Mr. Karsenty had to prove to the French court that his claims that the film is a fraud are legitimate claims. Karsenty presented enough evidence for the French court to rule against a state operated entity and this is a big upset in France because this does not typically happen. The state almost never loses.
Karsenty had several experts come to his aid as technical witnesses that the whole thing did not add up but the French court also at last had a look at some more of the film that France 2 TV had steadfastly refused to show up until this point. It clearly showed Palestinian operatives staging a faux fight between themselves and the far off Israeli security forces. It revealed fake rescues of unharmed people, fake casualties and staged injuries. What the court saw was the creation of Palestinian propaganda. In other words, the “death” of Muhammad al-Dura was a staged lie, invented as theater by Palestinian operatives to use as anti-Jewish propaganda. Karsenty, for his part, has demanded that France 2 TV admit their lies.
Now it is time for France 2 to acknowledge that it created and is continuing to perpetuate the worst anti-Semitic libel of our era. It’s the responsibility of the French government and, ultimately, the responsibility of the French president, Nicolas Sarkozy — who is, for all practical purposes, the chief executive of French public television — to finally reveal the truth.
Since the New York Times has used this story to the succor of terrorist supporters everywhere since 2000, one might imagine that the Times would rush to correct the record now that the evidence proving that the al-Dura tale is a lie has been accepted by French courts.
One would be wrong to assume that the Times was so willing to debunk its favorite anti-Jew story, sadly.
There is no story in the Times print edition on the Karsenty victory since the French court ruling was handed down on May 21st. Not one. All I can find is one mention in a NYT Internet blog, The Lede, by Times blogger Mike Nizza from May 21st, 2008.
And, instead of a story revealing how this al-Dura film was a lie, what does Nizza conclude about the court case? That the “debate” is “far from over.”
The court’s ruling has not been released, increasing the likelihood that this round in a continuing debate is far from over.
Nowhere does Nizza mention that the rest of the al-Dura film clearly shows the staging of a firefight. Nizza doesn’t bother with the fact that the al-Dura death scene was an Oscar worthy performance by Palestinian propagandists.
So what gives, New York Times? Why the reluctance to cover this new twist in the al-Dura story that you have used so many times in the past to support Palestinian terrorists? You have used this tale to beat the Israelis up for 8 years, now. But, we have final proof that this is a faked video. The Jews didn’t kill little Muhammad al-Dura.
Where is your story now?
» Filed Under Bigotry, Islam, Islamicfascism, Liberal Media/Bias, News, War On Terror, terrorism
Trackback URL
Comments
23 Responses to “News Blackout – New York Times Ignores Momentous Pro-Jewish Court Case Win in France”
-
Affiliations
The Giants
-
Donate
Steal Me
Our Store
Click the design to visit our store and help Stop the ACLU!
More blogs about the ACLU
Speaking of propaganda…”a kick in the teeth to the Israelis seeking only peace.”… you lost all credibility there. Like there was NO cause at all.
Obviously you’ve paid no attention to what was happening before the second intifada. The Israelis were in the midst of honest negotiation and the Pallies merely pulled out WITHOUT provocation.
Too bad you are a terror supporter there Jim.
Without provocation? Isn’t that always the claim, Israel never did anything wrong in your mind. That’s pure blindness.
And then you make an ignorant attack exposing your prejudice.
Let me make this very clear for you. I do not support advocates of violence, regardless of color, shape, size, race, species, planet of origin, etc. Do you get it yet?
Now, if you are really concerned about Israelis, or the Palestinians, right now is a good time to be following current events and supporting the peace process. Unless peace isn’t on your agenda.
Humanize the enemy, point it out, explain it, and challenge the world to follow. Proving peaceful intentions is easy, you just need to understand that wars start with words. My generation achieves world peace, because we have the power.
Peace in out times, eh Mr. Chamberlain… I mean Hovland? You are an apologist. Pure and simple.
That is in fact a standard canned answer of the emotional right showing your prejudice of those who disagree with your violent agenda.
Who am I apologizing for?
None of the violence is acceptable! None! Get it yet?
Let me clue you in to one very simple fact. You do not know me. I am an individual, and your prejudice stereo types do not fit me any better than they fit any of the people you attempt to apply them to.
The propaganda fuels the violence. This propaganda that you are pointing out is part of the problem, but it is only part. You also add to the problem, devoting this energy into demonizing Palestine. I would be just as “in your face” over Israel. No sides here, unless you advocate violence, then I’m opposed. Get it yet?
So you claim… but there is no doubt that you hld everyone to a high standard BUT the so-called palestinians. You’ve proved it here.
Todd, you are making assumptions without engaging in dialog. Try discussing the issue.
Propaganda and rhetoric have been a huge part of all the violence.
Look at this statement again.
“This propaganda that you are pointing out is part of the problem”
Yes Todd, that’s right, Palestinian propaganda is part of the problem. The Anti-Semitic text books in Palestine’s schools fuel the hate, and that causes violence.
Until these problems are understood and addressed, the violence will continue. No peace agreement can keep the peace while each populations are being demonized by the other.
Now, do I have to point out every fault the Palestinians have ever had before you understand that I do not approve? I am not stating that they have done nothing, or that none of it is their fault. This conflict has been fueled from both sides, and until you can say that, you’re part of the problem.
To move forward, we must move forward.
I was expecting a response, maybe you’re still formulating one, or maybe you’re just not used to the confrontation and don’t know what to do now.
You understand the problem clearly, I see that in this statement.
“a lie that has given succor to terrorism”
The propaganda and rhetoric on both sides re-enforce the conditions for violence. All of the contributing factors must be taken into consideration without giving favor to sides. I’m not for one violent group winning over the other, violence is violence.
Again….I challenge you to an open debate, a discussion, whatever. I’m not afraid of to engage those who disagree.
Well, Mr. Hovland, we are at just as impossible an impasse as the Israeli and Pallies, I’m afraid. You see, I see no reason whatever to give the Pallies even the tiniest benefit of the doubt.They’ve earned none and deserve none.
Certainly, the Israelis aren’t perfect and are not wholly blameless in all things. But the Pallies have not ONE legitimate grievance when all is said and done.
I see no reason at all to give them any succor. Their cause is illegitimate, their claim to be a people a lie, and their actions have been utterly, thoroughly dishonorable at every juncture.
So, in this light, I cannot hold a central position that gives no favor to either side. To do so legitimizes the Pallies.
So, where could you or I go with the debate?
You want to pretend they are the nice kids next door and forgive them of their crimes. You want to look the other way wish away the fact that they have no interest in good faith negotiations. You want to continue giving them more and more money to make rockets and buy weapons. You want to enable their mass murders.
So, tell me. Where could we go from here?
Lets start with… are you a Zionist and believe in a “Greater Israel”?
Not really. I do not believe that Israel has any right to forcibly expand its borders, necessarily. So, I can’t say I am a believer in the “Greater Israel” concept. I am a believer that Israel has a right to exist for two reasons. #1 the Israelis are an historical people who once had a land right where they are now, and #2 it IS established whether you like it or not.
They do have a right to defend their borders and it it means through efforts of war to take over land to do so, I support Israel in the effort.
On the other hand, there NEVER has been such a thing as a “Palestinian.” They are NOT an historical people. They never existed and they currently do not have an official homeland.
Now, if they get one by international agreement, I am not necessarily against that either. But if they do get a homeland and become a people it will be the first time in human history that they have existed.
Palestinians are not a “people.” They are Arabs, Lebanese, Syrian, what have you. There is no such thing as any Palestinian people. PERIOD.
That is the most irrational explanation I have heard yet. The people don’t exist! In your article, you use the name “Palestinian” what… maybe 15-20 times? You clearly recognize them by name, and know where their homeland is.
Denial is not a rational excuses for your prejudice views and hate. You have really eaten the propaganda up, haven’t you?
Yes, I used the word “Palestinian.” I also said so-called “Palestinian,” too. But did you not notice the quote marks around it? That denotes that the word inside the quotes is a claim and not fact.They are often called scare quotes.
But, you go ahead and give succor to terrorists. That is what you are on about anyway. Once you admit that you want all Jews dead just like your pals there, we’ll be finally getting to the truth. Who is the one filled with “prejudice views and hate”? I say it is you.You are a Jew hater if you are a pally supporter.
I wonder, are you a Holocaust denier? I’ll bet you are. Willing to just blow it all off and say “ah, but it is ancient history” to assuage your desires to be “reasonable.”
There is, of course, a time to be “reasonable.” When reasonable times present themselves, being reasonable is perfectly understandable. But, there are also times when looking for “reasonable” reasons just for the sake of being “reasonable” is a fool’s errand. You are wallowing in that errand right now.
You want everything to be nice, to be easy, to be balanced and “reasonable.” But there are times when humans don’t want to be “reasonable.” The pallys don’t want reason. They want only one thing and it is a thing that is non-negotiable with them. They want all Jews dead.
You support the pallys and you support genocide against the Jews. There is no middle ground. They’ll not have any, your powerless desires for balance quite aside.
So, pretend you are “civilized” all you want, but your blind stupidity in supporting the pallys is tantamount to supporting a new Holocaust.
Is that what you want? A new Holocaust against the Jews?
So you are saying that one can not support Palestinians without hating Jews now?
I can tell you that this “They want all Jews dead.” is plain ignorance. PERIOD.
Why are you getting so emotional about this?
Let me explain this to you again.
You do not know me. You do not know what I want. And! you will never learn until you realize that. PERIOD
Ah, but you imagine you know me? Still, I really have little need or desire to “learn” anything from the likes of you.
YES, I am saying you cannot support the pallys without supporting a new Holocaust against the Jews.
However, that is the end result of support for the pallys. I do not imagine, really, that everyone who foolishly imagines that there is a “reasonable” solution to the problem really specifically wants all Jews dead. But, ANY support for the pallys IS support for their cause because any support given them is USED for that purpose.
We bombed Dresden, et al, to kill millions of Germans in WWII. We dropped the A-Bomb on Nag. and Hiro. to kill tons and tons of Japanese. It wasn’t because each and every citizen of those countries supported their extreme government. There is no doubt that many, many innocents were killed. But we did so because ANY support that that citizenry gave to support their warmongering government was a danger.That support had to be crushed.
Similarly, your foolish desire to be “reasonable” gives direct support to a new Holocaust against the Jews.
You can pat yourself on the back for being “civilized” but you are not dealing with civilized people. The pallys are murderers. Each man, woman and child is guilty through and through. Until they repent and become humans, they do not deserve to be treated as such.
And your mollycoddling of them only worsens the situation.
Is this… “Until they repent and become humans” …not the result of “dehumanizing the enemy”?
But it is worse than just that because your hate is not simply directed at the “terrorists”… “Each man, woman and child is guilty through and through.”.. but at all Palestinians.
So you group all Palestinians together as less than human, including innocent women and children. Is that a “yes”?
And… you believe that this attitude is not a result of all the attempts to “dehumanize the enemy” by other advocates of war?
This is all very interesting. Sad, but still a very interesting case study.
How long have you felt like this?
Why dont the ‘reali’s and the Pallies have a Rainbow Gathering and forget all about this obsolete Nation-state stuff. Get over it!
James, I think this Warner Todd guy is just goading you on. No one could really believe the kind of crap he is trying to pedal. Edwin
Edwin, I understand what you mean, but I think this guy actually believes what he says. It seems kinda out there to me too, but I’ve checked into this guy, and he talks like this non-stop. Any logical thought this guy may have had is still waiting it’s turn behind a seemingly endless line of emotional triggers.
He seems to buy into conspiracy theories like Islam wanting to kill or enslave us all. He doesn’t distinguish between groups and individuals unless it fits his agenda. What this guy does has nothing to do with reporting news or showing anything that might resemble insight, he just pushes the same old rhetoric that has lead us to exactly where we are. It is unfortunate, but to know what is truly wrong we have to study and understand people like this.
I believe the agenda is to sway public opinion in support of overwhelming force. These type of people see this as an answer to a problem they are absolutely desperate to solve, and frustrated that an “answer” is there and not being taken. All I see is a propagandist hack attempting to “demonize the enemy”. It’s really sad that at his age, he still hasn’t learned to separate fear from reality, but you also have to consider the complete control of information he grew up with.
Well, we’ve had plenty of Jimmie boy’s Oh,so smarter, oh, so more civilized, tsk, tsking and his tacit support of terrorism enough. Tell us Jimmie, what is YOUR point? What is YOUR “solution”? You haven’t really said a word yet.
The solution is to use our manipulative know how and force peace on the people through the proper channels. It’s called propaganda, and we as a nation have some of the very best practitioners in the world, next to Israel’s that is. Yes our best ally is our best ally and again they are beating us to the punch on this advancement.
The fact that constant hateful propaganda leads to violence has been recognized. This is currently being addressed in Israeli and Arab media as well as efforts to improve images and relations.
Watch this unfold, and understand what is happening. The paradox of fear and defense has been solved as a result of the need to re-evaluate the situation, due to the threat of terrorism. The aspect of terrorism took the ‘defense’ out of the paradox leaving ‘fear’, based on what? What causes, and allows, a nation to wage war, or terrorists to commit violence? In the wake of 9/11 and then ‘Shock and Awe’ this was a serious and urgent question, no longer simply a partisan one. The answer is many factors, but all easy enough to understand and all within our control.
Do you notice any major changes in policies? Rhetoric? Propaganda? It’s all there, all you have to do is look for it and you’ll see what I’m talking about.
Let’s give a hand to Neville Chamberlain, everybody. “Peace in our times.” Ah, the panacea of it all.
You are a foolish man to neither realize human nature, nor the actual specifics of this conflict.
But, you go on and dream that dreamy dream if it builds you self esteem better. Too bad for reality that more will uselessly die because of your efforts, though.
But, do pat yourself on the back for being oh, so “civilized.”
Last question… were you trained to this blind opinion by our feckless and idiotic boys at Foggy Bottom?