« Achmed, the Dead Terrorist | Main | Holocaust by Bullets »

October 03, 2007

The Al Durah Blood Libel

When Daniel Pearl was beheaded, the jihadists in the death video noted as one of their grievances, the murder of little Muhammed al Durah by Israeli soldiers.

The second intifada got a kick start with al Durah's "martyrdom."

Osama bin Laden made reference to Muhammed al Durah in one of his cave videos.

There are al Durah streets and boulevards in almost every Arab capital.

But the al Durah murder never happened.

It was another Pallywood production.

Here's an invaluable thirteen minute video with commentary. Birth of an Icon.

Where is Muhammed al Durah?

Probably in a madrassa in Pakistan.

Charles Enderlin, the French reporter who broke the story, used 59 seconds of footage shot by Palestinian cameraman Talal abu Rahmah that shows a cowering father and son against a cinder block wall, under fire, Enderlin claims, by merciless Israeli soldiers.

And then, little Muhammed dies. It is horrible and one can only recoil from the horrific imagery.

But if you look at the footage, there is no blood. None. Zero. It is a grotesque set-up designed to inflame and incite violence against Israel and anyone who supports Israel, for who can speak up in defense of cold-blooded child killers.

Further investigations revealed that Israeli soldiers, positioned and angled as they were, could not possibly have shot at the father and son. The bullets could only have come from Arab gunmen.

French reporter, and let's face it, a man whose work reveals a profound bias against Israel, Charles Enderlin has withheld footage from the shooting for seven years, claiming that he does not want the footage to be used for "partisan purposes."

In plain language this means the out-takes reveal that the shooting was produced by Palestinian terrorists in collaboration with cameraman Talal abu Rahmah, and once viewed the Israelis would be exonerated.

For Enderlin and his supporters, truth is now a partisan issue.

Stepahine Gutmann writes in depth about the al Durah affair in Chapter Two of her important and timely book, The Other War: Israelis, Palestinians and the Struggle for Media Supremacy. As I have said before, Gutmann's book is an eye-opener about the corruption and bias of the mainstream media in their coverage of Israel.

Tirelessly, Professor Richard Landes has written of the al Durah blood libel. Courageously and with laser-like precision Landes has hammered away at Charles Enderlin, the French TV Network that employs Enderlin, and the left-wing Israelis who are content, if not anxious to shoulder the blame for the make-believe death of a child. Anything to suggest that occupation is the root cause of all conflict and hatred in the region.

In truth, Israel's existence, and a Jewish presence in the Middle East is the religious grievance that is at the root of jihad. All else are convenient fig-leafs to make western liberals comfortable as they enable Jew-hating jihadists.

Natan Sharansky published this article, Palestinian Propaganda Coup, in The Wall Street Journal.

Last month, a French court heard an appeals case whose forthcoming verdict will have far-reaching ramifications for all who value truth and accuracy in Middle East news reporting. The case involves Philippe Karsenty, a French journalist and media commentator, who was found guilty of defamation after he called for the firing of two France 2 Television journalists responsible for the Sept. 30, 2000, news report on the alleged killing of a 12-year-old Palestinian boy, Mohammed al-Dura, by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF).

It has been seven years since France 2 Television broadcast the excruciating footage of Mohammed and his father Jamal crouching in terror behind a barrel in Gaza’s Netzarim Junction while, according to the report, under relentless fire from IDF soldiers. The 59-second clip, which ends with the boy apparently shot dead, was presented around the world as an unambiguous case of Israeli savagery.

The tape fanned the flames of what became known as the second intifada. The boy Mohammed was the iconic martyr, his name and face gracing streets, parks and postage stamps across the Arab world. His memory was invoked by Osama bin Laden in a jihadist screed against America, and in the ghastly video of the beheading of American Jewish journalist, Daniel Pearl.

Shortly following the al-Dura incident, however, a series of inquiries cast grave doubt on the accuracy of the original France 2 report. The official IDF investigation concluded that, based on the position of IDF forces vis-à-vis the Duras, it was highly improbable, if not impossible, that an Israeli bullet hit the boy. Research by the Atlantic Monthly, the New Republic and Commentary magazine concurred. Then a German documentary revealed inconsistencies and probable manipulations in the account of France 2’s lone journalist on the scene that day, Palestinian cameraman Talal Abu Rahmeh.

And yet France 2 refused to release Abu Rahmeh’s full 27 minutes of raw footage. It did, however, agree to let three prominent French journalists view the footage. All three concluded that it comprised blatantly staged scenes of Palestinians being shot by Israeli forces, and that France 2’s Jerusalem Bureau Chief Charles Enderlin had lied to conceal that fact.

Subsequently, alleging gross malfeasance, Mr. Karsenty called for the firings of Mr. Enderlin and France 2 News Director Arlette Chabot. But France 2 stood defiant, suing Mr. Karsenty for defamation.

The defamation trial passed almost unnoticed in Israel, to the apparent detriment of Mr. Karsenty’s case. In his ruling in favor of France 2, judge Joël Boyer five times cited the absence of any official Israeli support for Mr. Karsenty’s claims as indication of their speciousness.

Israel’s decision to stay on the sidelines was unfortunate because the truth always matters. The al-Dura incident wasn’t the only media report to inflame passions against Israel in recent years, but it was the one with the highest profile. Moreover, if, as Mr. Karsenty and others have claimed persuasively, the al-Dura incident is part of the insidious trend in which Western media outlets allow themselves to be manipulated by dishonest and politically motivated sources (recall the Jenin “massacre” that never was, or the doctored Reuters photos from Israel’s war against Hezbollah in 2006), then France 2 must be held accountable.

It is important to note that the al-Dura news report profoundly influenced Western public opinion. When I served in the Israeli government as minister of Diaspora Affairs from 2003 to 2005, I traveled frequently to North American college campuses. I heard first hand how Mohammed al-Dura had shaped the perceptions of young people just beginning to follow events in the Middle East. For many Jewish students, the incident was a stain of dishonor that called into question their support for Israel. For anti-Israel students, the story reaffirmed their sense of Zionism’s innately “racist” nature and became a tool for recruiting campus peers to the cause.

To its credit, Israel has come to recognize that it must play an active role in uncovering the truth. The IDF recently sent a letter to France 2 demanding the release of Talal Abu Rahmeh’s 27 minutes of raw footage, asserting the implausibility of IDF guilt for the death of Mohammad al-Dura, and raising the possibility that the entire affair may have been staged.

Tragically, there is no way to repair the damage inflicted on Israel’s international image by the France 2 report, much less restore the Israeli and Jewish victims whose lives were exacted as vengeance. It is possible, however, to deter slanderous news reporting — and the violence that often accompanies it — by setting a precedent for media accountability via the handover of Talal Abu Rahmeh’s full 27 minutes of raw footage. Encouragingly, the judge presiding over Mr. Karsenty’s appeal has now requested the tapes. France 2 must make a full public disclosure. If there is nothing to hide, why should it refuse?

Mr. Sharansky is chairman of the Adelson Institute for Strategic Studies at the Shalem Center in Jerusalem.

Al Durah archives from Pajamas Media. An excellent resource.

From Professor Landes: French Court Orders Rushes

Israelis (Finally) Go After Enderlin. Be aware, you will need to keep scrolling down to read entire story.

Enderlin Lies

Five Scenarios of the al Durrah Affair

Conversations with Charles Enderlin Ditto, as far as scrolling down to read entire story.

A final note: What is to be done with Charles Enderlin? With his al Durah footage and report he fanned the flames of violence that led to the deaths of hundreds if not thousands of people.

Did Enderlin know that his story was a fraud, another Pallywood hoax designed to bolster the image of Israel and Jews as savages who deserve every homicide bomber that comes their way?

The Talmud teaches us that we never know what's in a man's heart. Thus we can only judge a man by his actions. Charles Enderlin has long known of Pallywood lies. To Professor Landes regarding Palestinian hoax footage he said: “Oh, they do it all the time, it's their cultural style.”

Thus Enderlin reveals that he's racist, holding Arabs and Muslim culture to a low standard of behavior.

He also admits, indirectly, that the Arabs manufacture news stories—lies—but such propaganda is acceptable because, well, it's part of their culture.

Monsieur Multi-cultural Enderlin.

In short, Enderlin's actions betray his motives and biases at every turn. Charles Enderlin assisted an infamous hoax and for seven long years has attempted to cover up his criminal behavior.

Enderlin has blood on his hands. He is an accessory to murder.

Enderlin should be stripped of his Israeli press credentials and then arrested and charged as an accessory to homicide and conspiracy to cover up the evidence of his crime. Failing this Enderlin should escorted into Gaza. Let Hamas have him. They deserve Enderlin and he certainly deserves Hamas.

And France2, the Network that broadcast this footage and has supported Enderlin's cover-up, what is to be done about this network that helped flame jihad? They should be kicked out of Israel. Let every foreign correspondent know that such wretched standards of journalism will no longer be tolerated by the Jewish state.

Freedom of the press does not mean that reporters are free to manufacture blood libels.

In observance of Shmeni Atzeret, Simchat Torah and then Shabbat, Seraphic Secret will be off-line until Sunday. Karen and I wish all our friends joyous holidays, and a lovely and meaningful Shabbat.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at October 3, 2007 01:15 PM

Comments

Seraphic Secret is private property, that's right, it's an extension of our home, and as such, Karen and I have instituted two Seraphic Rules and we ask commentors to act respectfully.

1. No profanity.

2. No Israel bashing. We debate, we discuss, we are respectful. You know what Israel bashing is. The world is full of it. Seraphic Secret is one of the few places in the world that will not tolerate this form of anti-Semitism.

That's it. Break either of these rules and you will be banned.

Posted by: Bookworm at October 4, 2007 08:39 PM

Posted by: mo'ah kemo ephro'ah at October 6, 2007 09:53 PM

Posted by: Robert J. Avrech at October 6, 2007 11:06 PM

Posted by: Robert J. Avrech at October 6, 2007 11:11 PM

Posted by: Dave (Balashon) at October 8, 2007 05:05 AM

Posted by: soccerdad at October 8, 2007 06:07 AM

Posted by: Robert J. Avrech at October 8, 2007 09:23 AM

Posted by: MikeDevxPatriot at October 11, 2007 05:14 AM

Posted by: Robert J. Avrech at October 11, 2007 11:01 AM

Post a comment

Name:

Email Address:

Security Code:

URL:
Remember Me? YesNo

Comments: (you may use HTML tags for style)