Round Three: France2 Appeals to the Cour de Cassation

I just received news from Philippe Karsenty that France2 has taken the case to the highest court of appeals. The implications of this decision are manifold. Accepting comments.

79 Responses to Round Three: France2 Appeals to the Cour de Cassation

  1. abu yussif says:

    i do not know/understand the french legal system, but it seems to me that if they lose again (and they very well could/should) it will be more difficult this time for the media to ignore the story. can’t blame them for trying to save face, especially when there’s really nothing more to lose (except for the possible increased publicity from another loss).

  2. The most important attribute for any media type is their credibility. In this case, the French media which is generally anti-Israeli, has ‘hyped-up’ anything that is anti-Israel. Unfortunately, they put alot of their reputation behind this story, which turns out to be completely false! The sad part of this entire fiasco, is that the non-partisan viewer will never be able to commit to French/Palestinian media because of these made-up stories.

  3. E.G. says:

    According to Luc Rosenzweig, the High Court (cour de cassation) can only judge the previous ruling’s form (i.e. technicalities), not the substance. And Michel Gurfinkiel adds that this is the first time a media case goes that far. The sense of this unprecedented choice is, according to Gurfinkiel, no other than to continue persecuting Karsenty.

    Both authors make (in French) many illuminating comments on the case and call for an open, honest public debate.

    http://michelgurfinkiel.com/articles/170-France-Le-droit-au-debat.html
    http://www.desinfos.com/article.php?id_article=10165

  4. E.G. says:

    Readers of this site will certainly find Mr. Enderlin’s blog comments illuminating.

    The French original text is followed by an English translation, for those who are not fluent enough with the servant of the Great Truth’s native language.

    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

    Quelques vérités sur la campagne de désinformation et de diffamation
    dimanche 25 mai 2008 à 09:48 :: Al Dura :: Alerter la modération

    Je constate que les attaques contre moi et France 2 ont commencé à l’automne 2002 après la publication de mon livre « Le rêve brisé » et avant la diffusion du documentaire du même nom. Elles ont repris lors de la publication de l’ouvrage suivant : « Les Années perdues ».

    Par ces travaux, je réfutais, preuves à l’appui, les arguments de propagande selon lesquels Arafat aurait refusé l’offre généreuse d’Ehoud Barak à Camp David en Juillet 200O et déclenché l’Intifada. Arafat a sa part de responsabilité dans l’échec du processus de paix, mais n’a pas reçu d’offre israélienne généreuse à Camp David et n’a pas déclenché Intifada. Visiblement cette campagne est destinée à occulter la réalité que je présentais à mes lecteurs et à mes téléspectateurs.

    Cette campagne est soutenue par des organisations de droite pro-israéliennes, américaines et françaises ainsi que par le CRIF dont le Président, Richard Prasquier était présent aux côtés de Philippe Karsenty lors de la dernière audience. A noter également que le CRIF a payé les frais de justice d’une personne condamnée pour diffamation anti-juive à mon égard. En d’autres termes, les antisémites peuvent à présent se tourner vers le CRIF pour leurs frais de justice… Le message que ces organisations envoient aux professionnels qui sont sur le terrain est clair : « Si vous diffusez des images ou publiez des informations qui portent atteinte à l’image d’Israël, nous lâcherons la meute… »

    Some Truths on the disinformation and libeling campaign against France2 and myself

    I note that the attacks against me and France 2 started in the autumn of 2002, right after my book “The Broken Dream” was published and before a documentary by the same name was broadcast. The attacks started again when the next book ” The Lost Years” was published.

    In these studies I refuted and substantiated the propaganda arguments according to which Arafat refused Barak’s 2000 Camp David generous offer, and launched the Intifada. Arafat has his part of responsibility in the failure of the peace process but he did not receive a generous Israeli offer at Camp David and he did not launch the Intifada. It looks like this campaign is intended so as to dissimulate the reality I present to my readers and spectators.

    This campaign is backed by American and French right-wing pro-Israel organizations, as well as the CRIF whose president, Richard Prasquier, was present next to Philippe Karsenty on the last trial hearing. One should also note that the CRIF payed the trial costs of a person who was found guilty of anti-Jewish libel against me. In other words, antisemites can presently turn to the CRIF for their trial costs… The message that these organizations are sending to professionals on the ground is clear: “If you broadcast images or publish information that harm Israel’s image, we set the (hound) pack off…”

    The entry continues with 8 comments about “facts”. But I’d like to stop here for now to draw attention to the following:

    - Correlation/co-occurrence does not necessarily imply a causal relation. So there is no sufficient proof that Mr. Enderlin’s book publication and film broadcast triggered any attack.
    It should have triggered some criticism – but that’s not an attack, even if the critique may not have been as unanimously laudatory as the author expected it to be.

    - Mr. Enderlin’s presentations of the alternative reality were numerous (in all and every media and bookshop) and, to the best of my knowledge, neither censored nor eventful. Mr. Enderlin’s presentations have been highly visible and only if one lives in a secluded place could one be unaware of them.

    - I personally witnessed, tongue firmly held in cheek, quite a few notorious antisemites at the last (obviously secret) meeting of the Elders of the CRIF.

    - The message supposedly conveyed to “on the ground” professionals by the hawkish Franco-Israeli branch of the world-wide Evil Lobby is very interesting. It tells that according to Mr. Enderlin (a) Israel’s image conveyed by the media a very good one, (b) that this excellent image needs to be tarnished (or at least corrected) to reflect a less ideal and more realistic one, and (c) the valiant tarnishing endeavor is a self-sacrificing mission.

    I’m grateful to acknowledge that what I thought was a disastrous image is in fact an image that’s too good to be true.
    On the other hand, I’m afraid Mr. Enderlin has a hearing or reading comprehension problem. Would someone volunteer a didactic explanation of the press professional ethics code?

  5. Nick Polyak says:

    E.G,
    Reading Enderlin’s blog is like reading Der Sturmer: both make us (jews) feel how powerful we are:)

  6. diana hamilton says:

    Somebody should correct and/or add this latest development in Wikipedia, under “Charles Enderlin”. Thanks. D.S.Hamilton

  7. Joanne says:

    In a sense, France2 is making a tactical error, or at least it might be. By taking the issue to a higher court, France2 and Charles Enderlin are only guaranteeing that the story stays alive, that it will get more coverage, and that more people will get to hear Karsenty’s arguments and evidence. Instead, they should have let the matter drop. The friendly media (friendly to Fr2 and Enderlin, that is) would then just bury the story, not refer to it. This move only guarantees that the story stays alive.

  8. oao says:

    With all due respect to the commenters here, the real important aspect of Enderlin/France2 behavior is that segments of the west, particularly the MSM media, have essentially adopted the arab/islamic approach of “playing to win”, rather than deal with reality and facts. In other words, they propagandize dogma rather than inform.

    Once you start doing that all bets are off. You are essentially destroying western civilization and, therefore, has no chance of progress or survival.

    oao
    http://fallofknowledgeandreason.blogspot.com/

  9. andrew says:

    Two comments: about Enderlin’s declaration that
    the CRIF payed the trial costs of a person who was found guilty of anti-Jewish libel against him. Things move so fast, but I remember the story which, so far as I know, is no longer available on the site primo-europe.org. A member of a Christian organization had
    expressed his disbelief in Enderlin’s report of the
    al-Durrah case: Enderlin had sued him on the ground that this constituted an antisemitic attack, and won this suit in a French court (no comment): I assume (I do not know about it) that the Conseil Representatif des Institutions Juives may have helped this Christian friend of the truth in this absurd lawsuit. A second point: I believe that people at France 2 TV channel wish above all “not to lose face”. The “Cour de Cassation” will take her time before breaking (casser)
    the last judgment, if it does so: then, a new trial will have to be held (a counter-example: as a final judiciary episode of the Dreyfus affair, the Cour de Cassation broke the former judgment “sans renvoi”,
    i.e., without finding it necessary to present the case to a new court). It is likely that nothing will be closed before some considerable time (several years) have elapsed. During this period, who can expect that no new events, making a condemnation of Israel universal, will not occur ? then, whatever the final decision, France 2 will be able to boast “didn’t we tell you ?”. This may be an overpessimistic view: I believe it essential to continue inviting media, in the US in particular, to interest themselves in the case.

  10. oao says:

    It is likely that nothing will be closed before some considerable time (several years) have elapsed.

    Which is why this might be a smart move by enderlin: otoh, the case is buried for years from public view and the other he can claim that it is not closed in karsenty’s favor.

    it is a bad idea to overestimate victories such as this. the system has ways to defeat them.

  11. Rob says:

    A reasonable, though studiously ‘careful’ article in the Wall Street Journal is here.

    (Hope the link works.)

  12. Lorenz Gude says:

    In reading the Pajamas comment thread on the subject I came across this comment:

    Bravo Phillipe,
    Nous sommes avec vous, bravo pour votre ténacité et votre courage ,
    Dieu vous garde et vous préserve

    Elisabeth Wanono,
    à Montréal

    http://tinyurl.com/54wkut

    The directness of her French ‘we are with you’ cut right to my heart. The ”God keep and preserve you’ reminded me emotionally of just how important this obscure judgment – in the court system of a faded power remarked upon only in the back streets of the Internet – really is. oao has it right – it is merely Western Civilization on trial. So carry on M. Enderlin, jusqu’au bout, ‘to the end’ – you are committed in any case.

  13. Rob says:

    Thanks, E.G. Very telling commentary from Poller. Despite oao, I can’t but hope this is too big to be made to just go away.

  14. Indeed, the Cour de Cassation doesnt examine the facts but only the way the inferior courts applied the law. It seems to me that France 2′s decision to take the case to Cassation is more politically-motivated than a merely legally, and it’s a proof of stubbornnes more than anything else (just like Enderlin’s stupid and fallacious comments in his blog, here
    http://blog.france3.fr/charles-enderlin/index.php/toc/home?toc_type=2)

  15. GabysPoppy says:

    France 2 should be very happy this story has received minimum attention in the world’s media.

    There is an old adage that says, “when you are in a hole, stop digging”. That seems to be lost on these idiots. Hopefully “round 3″ will get the attention that the original event received. To that I am not opomistic but at least I can still dream.

  16. E.G. says:

    andrew -

    Below is John Rosenthal’s account of the Charles Enderlin vs.Nicolas Ciarapica trial:

    http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/the-strange-anti-semitism-of-the-al-dura-case/

  17. oao says:

    Despite oao, I can’t but hope this is too big to be made to just go away.

    which is why I do not accept that I am pessimist. I am the realist here. so the right statement here is “despite all the hope, reality is what it is”.

  18. E.G. says:

    The following anecdote is a translated excerpt from G. W. GOLDNADEL’s blog. (lawyer, President of France-Israël Association)

    http://blognadel.over-blog.com/article-19904927.html

    A few days after the lynching of the two unfortunate Israeli reservists who got lost in Ramallah by a crowd literally tearing them to pieces, a common friend, working as journalist in the same chain as the nonsuited journalist [C.E.], phoned him in my presence to collect his comments after the R.A.I, as we may well recall, hurriedly announced the Palestinian Authority that they had absolutely nothing to do with the broadcasting of the images of the slaughter:

    - So Charles, it is true that the foreign journalists in Palestine are scared stiff?
    - You’d better say terrorized. But hey, I haven’t told you a thing…

    On the contrary, everything was said. On one hand, the certainty of the scoop and mainstream flattering comments. On the other hand, the reverential fear of displeasing. Afterwards, only afterwards, do the justifications, approximations and lies come.

  19. E.G. says:

    oao:
    “which is why I do not accept that I am pessimist. I am the realist here. so the right statement here is “despite all the hope, reality is what it is”.”

    see Goldnadel’s (link above) concluding remark:

    “Everything, including the Al Dura case, happens as if, having lost the media battle, Israel always ends up winning the History one.
    Always?”

    Let’s be optimistically realist: thanks to the internet, it’ll take less than a few decades to definitely prove and make the MSM clearly preach that the IDF never killed the al-Dura boy and tried as best that they could to avoid killing hundreds of other innocent youth coerced by their elders to serve as human shields or human bombs.

  20. Lorenz Gude says:

    As a student of the media I think that TV in particular has been able to hypnotize its mass audience, but that the Internet is beginning to change that. Karsenty, unless I remember incorrectly, criticized Enderlin on the Net. The Augean stables and Pajamas have prominently made an issue of it on the Net. I think it is unclear how awareness of the hypnosis is spreading among the populace. Some wake up directly from reading about it like the audience of this blog but there is, I believe, a more general awareness that the media is crooked spreading through the populace. Even the frankly liberal Daily Show uses mockery of the form of the media as its central comedic tool. I don’t think we know, much less can predict, when some critical mass will be reached where the MSM and TV in particular loses its influence. Even the Newseum in Washington DC admits in one of their exhibits that something like half don’t trust the media. Pessimists, admitted or otherwise, take care. The contagion of awareness may have spread further than you think.

  21. E.G. says:

    Lorenz Gude,

    Yes, I also think that credibility and trustworthiness are core issues. Unfortunately, a superficial retrospection of human communication (sorry, I’m neither a media student nor media savvy) shows that whatever the technology, the manner by which credence is attributed to an information and its source is problematic. Assessing the veracity or plausibility of an information item, as well as integrating it into one’s belief system, are often “contaminated” by irrelevant factors. That’s for instance why/how rumors spread, regardless of their factual basis.

    Regarding the predictability of the time range needed to reach (a) critical mass disbelief in MSM and (b) sufficient lack of MSM influence, the best I can do is bet. Even when I try to make an “educated guess”, 2 examples come to mind.

    -Soviet people’s distrust of their media by far preceded both the internet and the regime change.
    -It took a relatively short time (less than a decade) to convince a major part of the European public to support the Palestinian Cause rather than the Israeli state.

    So even if, as you state and I’d readily believe, that “the contagion of awareness may have spread further than you think”, the way from this point to the one where a person actually changes a long-held belief is not short, and even longer if the initial belief is strongly held.

  22. ALBERTO DWEK says:

    Frankly, I am at a loss here. How can a man who was responsible for the al-Dura blood libel complain that the media is pro-Israel? Just like Simon of Trent and so many others, al-Dura will remain an antisemite´s icon for ever, exactly because the media is so fiercely anti-Israel that no evidence or fact will ever be able to change the images and the words Enderlin so maliciously spread.
    Enderlin surely knows Francis Bacon´s wry comment on calumny. He should at least refrain from playing the sanctimonious martyr of the free press.

  23. oao says:

    Let’s be optimistically realist

    that’s like being agnostic when it comes to god: it’s really an atheist who does not want to present himself as such. in this case, an optimist who thinks an realist.

    thanks to the internet, it’ll take less than a few decades to definitely prove and make the MSM clearly preach that the IDF never killed the al-Dura boy

    as you can already see the MSM has no incentive and intention of doing that and there are too many factors that induce that, including an audience that, like MSM, which is a component of the same society, does no longer understand and appreciate knowledge, reason and truth. the point is truth is no longer important.

    the west is becoming as much a faith-based society (in a secular sense) as dar-el-islam. and when you got both dar-el-harb and dar-el-islam at the same level of backwardness, who would you bet will win?

    this is an example of optimism, not realism.

  24. oao says:

    but that the Internet is beginning to change that

    more unwarranted optimism.

    if the internet replaces the other media in prominence, you can rest assured that it will become very similar to MSM (it’s already happened in many ways). after all, media are a tool and it is how society uses the tool that determines its character. whatever made MSM what it is it’s making the internet too.

    now, it is true that the cost of entry is currently almost zero on the net. but that guarantees less and less traction as the same forces with resources that shaped the MSM shape the internet.

    furthermore, there is currently a law pending in congress eliminating net neutrality. if passed, the effect will be to turn the net into MSM.

  25. oao says:

    -Soviet people’s distrust of their media by far preceded both the internet and the regime change.

    having been born and raised in the soviet bloc, I can tell you why: the discrepancy between daily own experience and the nonsense spewed by the media was so enormous.

    here’s what I wrote about the difference between the soviet and western systems regarding this issue:

    ===================
    Ø I was born in one of the harshest members of the Soviet bloc and lived—if you can call that living–there until I was 13. When emigration was permitted, anybody who could, fled, including our large and close extended family. We scattered all over the world and lost contact and everything we had.

    Ø I came to the US to study on a scholarship; I enrolled in a political science PhD program, with the intention to pursue an academic career, and for 15 years studied, did research, taught and published on political systems and behavior (my BA is in economics, and I also hold an MBA).

    I mention this to point out that because I actually lived in a communist state, and studied politics, I have a better understanding of social systems in general, and of the difference between the Soviet and US systems in particular, than US/western armchair ideologues who have neither my experience, nor my education; who pummel their chests in defense of freedom, without a clue as to what that means; who understand neither capitalism, nor communism; and who, my guess is, never bothered to read Lenin and Trotsky, but nevertheless are quick to throw their books at those with whom they cannot sustain any meaningful intellectual argument.

    What struck me after living in the US for a while, was the similarity, at a very fundamental level, between the US and Soviet systems: while the means by which they attain their objectives differ, the objectives themselves are, for all practical purposes, the same: control and exploitation of the public. Both systems indoctrinate with propaganda from childhood. But because the Soviet system had coercion at its disposal, the propaganda did not need to be convincing: if you stepped out of line, the government came hard after you. That’s why propaganda could be blatant and absurd, and the public was fully aware of it and did not believe it, only pretended to. That is also one reason why the Soviet system collapsed.

    The US system cannot use coercion (well, not at the Soviet level, at any rate, but the way things are going, give it time), so it must rely solely on propaganda, which must be believed. This means it’s got to be very subtle and psychologically simple and attractive, rather than blatant and absurd, to be at once unobtrusive and effective. It’s no coincidence that the mother of marketing and advertising originates here. If you step out of line, the government does not need to come after you: business, the media, and even the public itself will. They cannot jail, torture, or disappear you (the system is testing the waters, though), but they will try to marginalize you, and make it very difficult to function professionally and socially. And at least insofar as members of the public are concerned, they are enforcers without realizing it. Quite elegant.

    Otherwise put, under Soviet “communism”, everybody must believe without questioning in the party, which almost nobody did; under US “capitalism”, everybody must believe without questioning in “the market”, which almost everybody does (I use quotes, because neither system is the true thing, as they pretend).
    =====================

    -It took a relatively short time (less than a decade) to convince a major part of the European public to support the Palestinian Cause rather than the Israeli state.

    that’s precisely because personal experience could not be a guide and it was accompanied by terror and jihad which scared the public into appeasement mood.

  26. E.G. says:

    oao -

    Oh, God! “Optimistically realistic” (or realistically optimistic) can be interpreted as a best outcome prognosis. Furthermore, how can you be sure that the current media trend is fully predictive of the future one (like, in 30 years)?

    It’s difficult for me to understand the point you’re trying to make. I’d appreciate and be grateful for a clarification.

  27. E.G. says:

    Oao-

    Thank God (No offence meant, merely an unsuppressable wink) and my parents, I’ve not gone through your commie experience. Your explanation clarifies indeed why Soviet media were not trusted by Soviet proletariat. But My point was that between incredulity and actual change there can be a long time lag.

    I agree with you on the personal experience factor (that would explain the quick opinion shift in Europe). But that’s the case with most people’s opinions about the “Global Village” – they’re mediated by, well, media, internet included. Which in turn make accuracy and completeness in reporting necessary features for credibility attributions. But the lack of personal experience is only one factor. There are a few others that no less contributed to the shift.

    I confess I’m surprised to read from a Soc. Sci. Academic the comments denoting surprise at some societal similarities between two very different political systems. All human groups (as well as many animal ones) have compliance mechanisms wired in their essence.

  28. fg, Budapest, Hungary, Central-Europe, A young foreign policy essayist in my home country says:

    MY FEAR…

    Sorry everyone to “disappoint”, but I will tell you something.
    Where there is the slightest suspicion – and mind you, there is quite a good deal – that you might not even be certain that your (here, Karsenty’s) case will be judged or adjudicated FAIRLY, once more, where you have second-guessing and elemental fears regarding the outcome of the process then that place is NO democracy, in my view. And here I am not certain a microscopic bit. Perhaps France is not a democracy in this sense, according to this “standard”, perhaps not Britain or Germany, either. The stakes are too high, and I – for one – do NOT trust their system a bit – zilch…

    So do notexpect much – it is better to prepare in advance!!!

    fg

  29. David Guy says:

    Can you believe this Rattling the Cage: Al-Dura and the conspiracy freaks. Jerusalem Post columnist Larry Derfner claims the people who believe the Mohammed al-Dura was not killed by Israel are conspiracy freaks on the level of JFK or 9/11 troofers.

  30. JimK says:

    I think the Israelis should start using the international courts to go after France2. I believe they have sufficient grounds to sue for millions in damages suffered from terror attacks during the second intifada. It can certainly be argued that the Al-Dura story was the spark that ignited the terror war.

  31. Al says:

    Type the words “al dura” into any google search and the first web site in the list will be wikipedia article.

    In wikipedia 3 dedicated pro Palestinian keep the article true to the France-2 version….

  32. oao says:

    Furthermore, how can you be sure that the current media trend is fully predictive of the future one (like, in 30 years)?

    Because you look ONLY at the media and I also look at what forces shape the media, which is just one component of society and thus subject to those forces like the rest of the components. The media gets away with what it does because of its audience. And I see the audience getting worse, not better.

    But My point was that between incredulity and actual change there can be a long time lag.

    There can be, but it is also possible that credulity won’t stop and change won’t come, which was MY point.

    But that’s the case with most people’s opinions about the “Global Village” – they’re mediated by, well, media, internet included.

    NO, you missed my point, and nobody who has not lived under soviet systems can really comprehend it. You are projecting western notions on the communist media.

    When you cannot find any food anywhere, not even toilet paper or matches, and stay hours in long line for bread, govt papers and the tv spewing absurdities about successes of communism in food production mediate zilch. When nothing works and everything collapses, and stealing is widespread, yet the media talks about wild progress, it mediates nada.

    But when the western MSM media do an al-dura, most of the public which is ignorant about the ME and does not care much except anti-semitism, appeasement of jihadis out of fear, and leftist cognitive egocentrism, it sure mediates, but mostly preaches to the choir.

  33. andrew says:

    To JimK,

    Please allow me to disagree with you. The first fight is that for truth, or at least for absolute recognition
    that things were presented by France2 in a grossly
    distorted way. This fight will be a very tough one in
    this country, considering the way the media are likely
    to react (almost all will support France 2). The
    consequences of this biased report are indeed impossible to evaluate, to start with in the number of
    life losses. If France2 is sued in order to make it
    accountable for the consequences of this report, the
    whole political class of France (not to say the whole country) will unite behind it, making any progress towards the truth downright impossible.

  34. oao says:

    I confess I’m surprised to read from a Soc. Sci. Academic the comments denoting surprise at some societal similarities between two very different political systems. All human groups (as well as many animal ones) have compliance mechanisms wired in their essence.

    2 answers:

    1. My surprise was not at as much that the US had compliance mechanism, but at the widespread illusion/delusion that it does not, relative to its obviousness in the soviet bloc. That’s exactly the elegance of its propaganda, which was my point.

    2. Just like you cannot really comprehend the soviet bloc unless you lived in it (you can only imagine), so did I have to experience the American system to really comprehend it.

    And that’s also why westerners who have not lived in the ME do not really comprehend islam, sharia and jihad.

  35. oao says:

    the
    whole political class of France (not to say the whole country) will unite behind it, making any progress towards the truth downright impossible.

    which is precisely why I argued that everybody plays to win, not to seek the truth. that’s what muslims do, and that’s why they don’t have a civilization and why we’re losing ours.

  36. E.G. says:

    Thanks, oao, for taking the time to explain.

    For some reason, your first paragraph in comment #29 does not take into account the last sentence (2nd paragraph) in my comment #27. At any rate, while we both agree that first-hand knowledge is an important factor in credibility attribution to media reports, though not the only one, I beg to differ on the mid-long term prediction. While you’re confident on the future media trend, I argue that it’s hard to tell how/in what direction will media evolve. I’m just a lot less confident about human predictive capacities (including my own) than you, as well as apparently much less experienced.

    Regarding credulity-change – sure. Maybe so, maybe no (hence my resort to betting).

    (Tech Q.: how do you change into italics?) you assert
    “But when the western MSM media do an al-dura, most of the public which is ignorant about the ME and does not care much except anti-semitism, appeasement of jihadis out of fear, and leftist cognitive egocentrism, it sure mediates, but mostly preaches to the choir.”

    At the risk of getting a “you’re contaminated by multi-culti, moral equivalence bla-bla without even being conscious about it” reply, I think that your above comment is too much of a generalization. And it does not explain the differences in public support, nor the shifts, to the Cause or the state.

  37. E.G. says:

    see full version:
    http://www.bakchich.info/article3912.html

    Translated excerpts

    Not very proud of France2, by Olivier Lerner, former France 2 journalist

    I was a France2 journalist during 15 years, from 1984 to 2001, I was their Berlin correspondent and, on numerous occasions, the chain’s special reporter from Jerusalem. I’m very familiar with the operating procedures of the the chain’s Israeli bureau: it’s masterfully managed by Charles Enderlin. Only voila… sometimes there are misses, “shortcomings in the system’s operating procedures”, as the dictionnary puts it.

    Karsenty/Enderlin: that’s sort of David vs. Goliath. France 2 played a dangerous game and it’s about to lose this judicial battle. France 2′s cameraman, Talal, was filming without his journalist on that Sept. 30 2000 day, and everybody knows well that in Gaza, they’ve been “playing” for years with photographers and journalists. Pallywood’s gone over there. Talal might have been fooled, Enderlin too!!! Still, sometimes admitting one’s errors or “system hortcomings” is all that’s needed. That’s all that was required of France 2, that thought it fit to dedicate a 14 second long newsbrief, on its May 21st evening news program, to the Paris Court of Appeal decision. I was a bit ashamed of “my chain”, that evening.

  38. Barry Meislin says:

    Sometimes, there are misses, “shortcomings…”…. Talal might have been fooled, Enderlin too!!!

    Heh.

    Utterly hopeless.

  39. oao says:

    Regarding credulity-change – sure. Maybe so, maybe no (hence my resort to betting).

    You may have not noticed that my core argument is that one of the indicators of the decline of western civilization is the collapse of education, leading to the fall of knowledge and reason. The consequences apply to the whole society, both media and its audience. Unlless a mechanism by which this process is reversed is elucidated, I don’t see a reason to question the continuation of the trend. Hope is not a substitute, it must have a basis in reality. My projection does have a basis in the process just described.

    Tech Q.: how do you change into italics?

    On WordPress by manually putting and at the start and end of the pertinent text.

    I think that your above comment is too much of a generalization. And it does not explain the differences in public support, nor the shifts, to the Cause or the state.

    It’s hard to do justice to these issues typing on a blog. Basically, when it comes to societies and social behavior there are always exceptions, but that’s all they are, they are not the rule. So generalizations are almost always partial, but still valid.

    AT this time I see the trends I mentioned going stronger, not weaker. When somebody specifies a persuasive mechanism for reversal and a convincing timeframe, I’ll consider it. “Uncertainty” and “hope” are not that, they stem from the human psychological needs, not reality.

  40. oao says:

    whoops, regarding italics:

    by putting i and /i between at start and end of pertinent text.

  41. oao says:

    whoops again: between smaller than and greater than symbols.

  42. AT says:

    Andrew … this fight is worth fighting, even if it means the entire country will initially unite around France 2. Fear of a challenge is often the lazy excuse for lack of cold, objective analysis of the possibilities.

  43. E.G. says:

    I think that Olivier Lerner’s paper is written

    (a) as a first hand account of Pallywood in Gaza;
    (b) as a reply to Enderlin’s often voiced dismissal of his detractors – none of them being “on the ground” journalists/reporters, and even those who did field-work, none has ever set foot in the Gaza strip;
    (c) to offer the most lenient interpretation of what happened, in order to show that despite the numerous simple ways to deal with an embarrassing fault and come out clean – France2 and its journalist chose to stubbornly cover up a dupery/ save face having been duped.
    (d) Put less euphemistically, the last sentence can be “My CV will look quite less prestigious now due to the chain’s insolent behavior”.

  44. SOKRATES says:

    1: The court decision is no approve of claims in the 18 minutes of fact-denying, Gobble like, propaganda fiction “Pallywood” from Richard Landes.

    2: The court decision is about freedom of expression. Freedom to deny what ever, including Holocaust denial (actually what Richard Landes should be compared with).

    3: It is a good decision as freedom of expression is the basis for a free democratic world with a credible press.

    4: People like Richard Landes (Holocaust deniers and such) can relax now, as they can go on offend media, and whole people (Palestinians, Kurds, Tibetans, WestSaharians, Gipsys, holocaust-survivors, etc.) without fear of any legal consequences.

    5: Richard Landes is good at fabricating lies and propaganda. His extremists zionist allyes at 2. draft are expert at media and film. They actually do not want to discuss media, they want to confuse media and people by obscuring facts about Israels crimes agains humanity (ascerted by Amnesty and HRW) with the uso of propaganda. But as facts gets more accessible as internet expands, they will have less chance of success.

    A few facts for Landes&Co to remember:
    - Zionism = racism (An ideology about putting up a nation on other peoples land, and only for jews)
    - Israel = colonizer
    - Israel = Thief

    Jews who lost their homes and lands and shops and industries (almost only in europe – not in middleast) got much of it back. But only after the nazi-ideology became history.

    Do palestinians have to wait unitl zionism is history to get back their land, homes, industries?

    To get justice?

  45. E.G. says:

    oao-

    May you live to enjoy your great-grand-children and witness your projections disproved happily ever after.

    iAT this time I see the trends I mentioned going stronger, not weaker. When somebody specifies a persuasive mechanism for reversal and a convincing timeframe, I’ll consider it. “Uncertainty” and “hope” are not that, they stem from the human psychological needs, not reality./i

    Uncertainty does not stem from any psychological need. But am I glad you mention hope!

    Hatikva (the hope) indeed had not much of a reality to begin with but it was very instrumental in making a dream become a reality, to paraphrase Herzl. And, keeping proportions, wasn’t it a drive for Richard Landes and his “ultra extremeist” allies? (call for testimony). Didn’t hope for a better life make your family emigrate? Hasn’t it driven them and you to rebuild an exisence out of the great fortune you were endowed with upon arriving to the free world?

    Don’t underetimate it. Hope is neccessary but insufficient to be a reversing factor.
    I don’t have the skill to construct a predictive model (whatever its validity). But I draw comfort from events such as the fall of the Soviet block, and the hostile reactions of people born and raised in pseudo-free-market regimes (to paraphrase you) towards Charia compatible rulings that some arrogate to themselves in the name of freedom, equality or plain Chutzpa. Plus, there’s the dissatisfaction of Flower-Power generation’s children with their own childhoods/parents and their unwillingness to perpetuate this “heritage” to their own children (see: education)… It’ll end up at a boilling point.

    Last but not least: isn’t the hopelessness that the Arabs of former Palestine are indoctrinated with, with the active participation of too many Intl. institutions, the main cause of their dependent, stateless, status? See “learned helplessness”.

  46. Cynic says:

    And that’s also why westerners who have not lived in the ME do not really comprehend islam, sharia and jihad.

    Not really. Only if they the Westerners,have their eyes and ears open and live among the natives are they likely to get an idea, and that is if the natives accept them sufficiently to let down their “honour” guard and not fill the infidel with “taqyia”.

    But the Westerners have no knowledge of history. The only thing they know about Constantinople is that it was like the Topkapi palace which they saw in a movie with, who was it, Inspector Clousseu, or some Hollywood hero, also in Turkey.

  47. E.G. says:

    C’mon, Cynic & Oao,

    How long have you been living/actually lived in Sharia-compliant Dar el Islam? And why are you depreciating contributions such as Bat-Y’eor’s?

    Westerners’ tolerance is challenged on a daily basis as Sharia outfits multiply on the streets, polygamy accepted de facto and often de jure, honor killing rates increase, and children are served strictly Hallal lunches in state school subsided cafeterias. I spare you the details, but only if Cynic can find me a Rhum next to Ustinov’s. A diamond or 2 will not be too much either :-)

  48. oao says:

    May you live to enjoy your great-grand-children and
    witness your projections disproved happily ever after.

    too old for that relative to where the west is now. but i often stated here that I will be glad to be proven wrong. has not happened yet.

    Uncertainty does not stem from any psychological need.

    when the reality is bleak and hope is just too much afainst it uncertainty will sometimes do.

    isn’t the hopelessness that the Arabs of former Palestine are indoctrinated with…

    you bought the hopelessness/helplessness argument? i suggest you get some idea of what islam is and what the arab culture is (not the western multiculti propaganda) and you’ll disabuse yourself from such nonsense. how come they do not feel hopeless/helpless in fighting to eradicate israel, but not to build themselves a nation and state and get a life?

    But the Westerners have no knowledge of history.

    EXACTLY!!!! And not just history. That’s my collapse of education argument.

    How long have you been living/actually lived in Sharia-compliant Dar el Islam?

    cynic has answered part of your question. I lived in Israel for 18 years and saw arab culture up close and its relation to the infidel jews. then pass by the jihad Watch and Dhimmi Watch and get a feel of what happens to infidels in arab countries.

  49. ned jacobson says:

    my dear sokrates…regarding your comment that jews who lost their homes ,land , and industries got most of it back…you just don’t get it…bring me back my gradfather and his 8 brothers and sisters(my great aunts and uncles). to hell with the property, land , money. the equivelancy between nazi ideology and zionism is a facile comparision for you, but just shows your lack of understanding. you do not get it and you never will.

  50. JimK says:

    I don’t know, Andrew,but I think this might just be this century’s Dreyfus case. Only this time it’s not a French military officer’s career that’s at stake but rather the fate of an entire nation.

  51. E.G. says:

    Yes, SOKRATES,

    WAIT.

    It’s far better than the other explosive strategies.

  52. E.G. says:

    Here’s an Israeli “hotter” shoulder for Richard Landes et alii. Or at least a public, well deserved, Thank You.

    Danny Seaman, the director of the Israeli Government Press Office, concludes his Ynet article (published yesterday):

    “In addition, as proven by Karsenty, Shahaf, Landes, journalists Gérard Huber and Stéphane Juffa, and others, the state can and should enlist the assistance of private professionals who are willing to fight for the State of Israel’s good name and for the truth.”

    http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3549532,00.html

  53. Cynic says:

    E.G.

    You have confused me. How long have you been living/actually lived in Sharia-compliant Dar el Islam? And why are you depreciating contributions such as Bat-Y’eor’s?</em.

    How do I depreciate her contribution by pointing out that Westerners lack fundamental knowledge of historical context?
    Having been in close proximity to “Dar el Islam” communities for lengthy periods, apart from having close contact with people who lived considerable parts of their lives in “Sharia-compliant Dar el Islam”, I could not but observe and eventually fathom out the taqyia and hypocrisy.
    As for
    Westerners’ tolerance is challenged on a daily basis as Sharia outfits multiply on the streets, all I can say is that so far it is nothing compared to the Sharia outfits in actual Dar el Islam.
    The Westerners don’t know the half of what to expect.

    Isn’t it now some half a millennium ago that Constantinople had its name changed?

  54. Cynic says:

    Hee! Forgot to close the emphasisbracket.

  55. E.G. says:

    Cynic,

    I didn’t mean to confuse you. But you were saying that only first-hand experience makes one really-really know and understand what we, Westerners, should expect. But in stating this, you are also arguing that the vicarious experience, the knowledge gained from reading Bat Ye’or or getting familiar with other accounts, is practically ignorance.

    Frankly, the little personal experience and the slightly larger vicarious one I have with the “Religion of Peace” is frightening enough. But I see my neighbors, presumably very ignorant and/or coached to Tolerance/Diversity, feeling more and more threatened by alien customs that are being imposed on them.

  56. [...] France2 has indicated they will take their appeal to the Cour de Cassation, Philippe Karsenty writes in an email about the next step that we have to take: The next battle [...]

  57. oao says:

    you are also arguing that the vicarious experience, the knowledge gained from reading Bat Ye’or or getting familiar with other accounts, is practically ignorance.

    nobody said that reading about a subject does not inform. what I think what both of us meant is that experiencing things is at a different level and that may be required for whether to believe media lies or not.

    note that bat-yeor is of egyptian extraction and lived there before emigrating. infidels or muslims who lived in dar-el-islam are more trustworthy because they experienced. as cynic said, the vast majority in the west has no clue what it means to live under sharia because not only they have not experienced it enough, but have not even educated themselves enough. rather, what they know they know from the media. which is the problem we started with.

  58. andrew says:

    Concerning Karsenty’s e-mail as referred to in
    message number 58. Philippe Karsenty states there that the next step should be political, and that President
    Sarkozy’s intervention is needed now. While I certainly
    regard Karsenty’s whole action up to now as brillant,
    not to say perfect, I believe that solliciting Sarlozy’s intervention is inviting disaster. No French
    President can take sides in the desired way in a dispute in which the state-owned television channel’s bad behaviour is at stake. This is especially true so
    far as Sarlozy is concerned: for some more than dubious
    reasons, he has already been accused several times by
    his ennemies on the left to be too close to Israel. Even if he wanted to (a look at the French current
    diplomacy may make this doubtful), he could not support
    Karsenty in his fight for truth.

  59. sg says:

    Andrew,
    During the first Karsenty trial, where he was convicted of libel, then-President Chirac sent a personal letter to the judges (contents undisclosed). This would’ve been a major scandal in the English speaking country I live in, but I guess the French do thigs differently.

    I suspect were Chirac still in power Karesenty would’ve again lost his appeal. I agree with you that Sarkozy intervening in the process would be a mistake. I suspect he’d like nothing better than a major scandal involving the State media, to justify reforming it, but it is therefore important he is not seen to be stirring up trouble beforehand.

  60. Cynic says:

    oao,

    Way back in 76 my wife and I had an experience with a woman from Leningrad who had made it out of Russia, which at the time left us speechless.
    She became hysterical reading Orwell’s book “1984″.
    When we had the chance to talk to her and try and understand what happened she would say “But I lived this. Can’t you understand?”
    No we couldn’t. We had no way of identifying with her as we had not experienced that way of life in the flesh. We had not sensed the fear, the dread that someone overheard our conversation, the fact that we could not trust anyone enough to speak our mind.

  61. E.G. says:

    Oao & Cynic (but not only)

    Glad we agree that personal experience is definitly a better means to be aware/informed but that “second-hand” experience is valuable. Frankly, I consider myself fortunate (and I’m sure you too do) to have had practically but second and third hand info.

    Now, my impression is that you believe that scaring Westerners (telling frightening truths/ first-hand experiences) is the most effective way to make us resist Jihad.

    Should media do it? Should bloggers do it when MSM takes the appeasing, disinformative strategy? Is frightening the most effective way to raise awareness?

  62. oao says:

    you believe that scaring Westerners (telling frightening truths/ first-hand experiences) is the most effective way to make us resist Jihad.

    unfortunately, scaring them leads to cowardice and appeasement. after all in the soviet bloc they experienced a lot, yet very few resisted. the system imploded by itself.

  63. oao says:

    sarkozy is a self-centered ass, all talk and no action. very french. I have no idea why anybody would think otherwise.

  64. oao says:

    No we couldn’t.

    Had I not lived in that system, I couldn’t have understood either. i would probably sense in an abstract way it was very bad (like most americans do), but not understand.

    my guess is that those of us who lived in totalitarian systems in which there there is practically comprehend much better what would happen under sharia than those who take their personal freedom for granted.

  65. oao says:

    oops, i meant “in which there is practically no freedoms”

  66. E.G. says:

    oao-

    Sorry, moi not kapisch what thou meaning.
    No OS failure detected. Please restate your message clearly.

  67. J says:

    Read wikipedia and you see that your efforts are all in vain.

    Type “al dura” in google and it takes you to wikipedia . Wikipedia is a neutral truthfull web site and it say:

    Palestinian journalist Talal Abu Rahma [1] filmed the father and son sheltering during a crossfire between troops at an Israel Defense Forces (IDF) outpost and Palestinian police and gunmen shooting from a number of locations.[2] After a burst of gunfire, the two slumped into prone positions. Al-Durrah was reported to have been killed and his father severely injured by Israeli gunfire.

  68. oao says:

    Read wikipedia and you see that your efforts are all in vain.

    indeed. if people rely on wikipedia crap and think it’s “neutral” efforts ARE in vain. exactly what i’ve been arguing is a consequence of the collapse of knowledge and reason.

    Sorry, moi not kapisch what thou meaning.
    No OS failure detected. Please restate your message clearly.

    sorry, don’t understand what you did not understand. Please clarify your question.

  69. Cynic says:

    J,

    If you have been keeping up with the facts an Israeli Doctor has already testified in a sworn statement that
    father severely injured by Israeli gunfire.
    the father was treated in 1992 for the wounds he displayed to the media, which were brought about by attcks from his co-religionaries.

  70. andrew says:

    To sg,

    I agree with you, up to some details: Chirac’s letter was a kind of affidavit in Enderlin’s favour. Of course, I feel just as you do so far as the ethical value of such an action by the former President is concerned: however, media in France do not seem to have anything to say against this. Still, it was pointed out here and there that Chirac’s letter had been written on another occasion (which one ? nobody
    told as much), not in support of the action against Philippe Karsenty. I believe that it would be hopeless, even counterproductive, to try to secure help from the Elysee in this fight for the truth. On the other hand, with the exception of Claude Goasguen, it would be hard to find in France any high-class politician openly supporting Israel. I believe that the
    best course of action, by far, would consist in trying to have more and more U.S. media (the French and British ones are hopeless) interest themselves in this
    affair. Considering the political-guided decisions made in the international tribunal in The Hague, I also doubt very much the value of addressing oneself to an international committee of experts to have the question clarified. There is only one reason not to be entirely pessimistic: it is almost impossible to believe (or am I wrong here ?) that the Cour de Cassation will want to reach a decision making a use of the rushes impossible, or illegal: having the rushes kept away from public viewing has consistently, with the exception of the last trial, been France 2′s best means of defense.

  71. E.G. says:

    sg – comment #61 and andrew, above,

    I join your opinion regarding Presidential interference.

    As for politicians intervention, as well as media exposure, the more this case is expressed in professional (journalistic ethic) rather than political (support of Israel) terms – the better. The “little Mo” case is just one example.

    Obviously supporting the “rebels” against the Communist regime in Romania in 1989, French TV (which chain was it?) did broadcast a fake, falsely attributing the discovery of mass-graves to mass killings by the secret police, and very quickly rectified the info and apologized. The French reporters on the ground were fed that false report by “rebelling”, unquestionably partial, sources. The case is all but forgotten.

  72. E.G. says:

    in addition to my above comment

    But the journalistic lesson hasyet to be learned.

  73. That France2 appealed to the Cour de Cassation, the highest court of appeals, is not only one more hurdle for Philippe Karsenty, but also a great opportunity to prop up publicity about the case and to spread the truth – the main challenge today.

    A great opportunity, under the condition that we use well all our ways to reach also the other side and new audiences. Nidra Poller’s Wall Street Journal article is a great achievement in this.
    We Take-A-Pen do multilingual efforts to operate grass-roots letter-writers around the world – any help is appreciated.

  74. oao says:

    But the journalistic lesson hasyet to be learned.

    Only in a culture and which an audience that would induce such a lesson.

  75. E.G. says:

    Only in a culture and which an audience that would induce such a lesson.

    That’s the purpose of Karsenty’s action and the raison d’etre of this site, no?

    (and, have you noticed I got the italics trick?)

  76. oao says:

    That’s the purpose of Karsenty’s action and the raison d’etre of this site, no?

    It is his purpose. The question is whether he will be effective. Knowing today’s audiences, I am skeptical.
    But hey, I’ll be glad if I am proven wrong.

  77. Eliyahu says:

    speaking of letters sent to judges by highly placed persons, when Jonathan Pollard was on trial in the United States [circa 1986], secretary of defense Caspar Weinberger of the Reagan adminstration, sent a letter to the judge in the case. This letter, so far undisclosed so far as I know, is supposed to have been decisive in the severity of the sentence against Pollard. So letters get sent in the US too.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>