Storm Clouds Over Paris

A gathering storm comes to a head in Paris this week as a series of lawsuits get underway. Three individuals who criticized France-2 TV’s world-famous footage of Mohammed Dura were sued for defamation by the powerful state-owned TV company. Specifically singled out for criticism were correspondent Charles Enderlin and cameraman Talal Abu Rahma. We encourage readers to see the video at Second Draft.

Associated with the trial are many powerful and uncomfortable issues, including anti-Zionism in the French media, the icon status of Mohammed Dura, Israel’s response to the affair, the disturbingly close relationship between France’s media and political elites, the fairness of French justice, the role of France 24 (dubbed the “French CNN” due to be launched in December), and—on a broader level—the future of French Jewry.

Pesach Benson of HonestReporting discussed the proceedings with Philippe Karsenty, the defendant in the first trial, which begins Sept. 14. Karsenty, 40, is the founder and president of Media-Ratings, a professional media analysis company based in Paris.

HonestReporting: People criticize the media all the time. Why are you in legal proceedings now?

Philippe Karsenty: We have a company, Media Ratings. Our goal is to analyze the media outlets. We’re not a blog, We respect bloggers very much but we are different. We're an established company. We’re not crazy people writing in their apartments. We treat all sorts of subjects, not just Israel. So the French establishment hates us. They consider me an insider and consider Media-Ratings dangerous. Our potential readers are all the French people. Media-Ratings is not a Jewish organization. We have 24,000 subscribers, which is big number for France.

HR: What’s the significance of this trial?

PK: The significance is that we published an article saying that Arlette Chabot, the head of the information desk at France 2 and Charles Enderlin, who narrated the Al Dura forgery, should resign because they refused to admit that they made a mistake and to correct the information. They were very upset we published this on our web site. The original article was published in Nov. 2004.You should see the Fox News report which was made concerning the Al Dura story. France-2 sued us at the beginning of 2005. The French legal system is very slow and it’s only being heard now, the 14^th of September, in the 17^th chamber of the Paris Tribunal where they hear defamation cases.

HR: What led you to conclude that the video was a forgery?

PK: The cameraman offered the images to CNN, and they rejected it because Talal wouldn’t offer guarantees that it was legitimate. On the same day, Talal made another forgery filming fake scenes. Reuters filmed him filming other forged stories. On the first scene of the France 2 report before the child is killed, you see the scenes he filmed are fake.

They broadcast a scene where the guy was supposedly hit in the leg by a bullet but there’s no blood. People are dragging him on the sidewalk and there’s no blood. An ambulance comes, it takes two seconds from the time he’s supposedly wounded and the ambulance comes. Two seconds just doesn’t make sense, it’s too fast. And the people putting him on the stretcher lie him down directly on the leg where he was supposedly hit.

Charles Enderlin says the father and son are the target of Israeli soldiers. Enderlin claims he never said that Israel killed the boy. But he said, “The father and son are the target of Israeli soldiers” which implies that it was deliberate. On the 3^rd of October, Rahma said the murder of Dura was intentional and in cold blood. But he told Esther Shapira (of Germany’s ARD), he claims he never said that.

The day of the shooting was a protest day in Gaza. All the shops were closed. Dura’s father, when he was questioned, said he took his son to the market to look at a used car. But everyone knew the shops were closed.

Also important, at the end of the France 2 film, you see someone flash two fingers in front of the camera just to show a second take. It was done just two centimeters in front of the camera. It doesn’t make sense. You can see it. It’s done in the way to show that a scene has just ended.

Rahma said he filmed for 45 minutes, but you only see one bullet which hits the wall above the adult and the kid. This shot was a Palestinian bullet. The angle showed it came from the Palestinian compound.

Ten seconds before [Dura] died, you hear a voice shouting in Arabic “The kid is dead, the kid is dead, the kid is dead.” But he hasn’t been hit yet.

At the end of the film, when he’s supposedly dead, there’s movement that doesn’t make sense. He raises his elbow, looks at the cameraman and puts down his elbow. The father pretends he received nine bullets himself, but if you look at the images, you see no blood on his white shirt.

When Rahma was asked why he didn’t film the Israelis shooting, he said he said he wanted to spare his batteries.

France 2 claims they have 27 additional minutes of footages. They invited two independent experts to watch the video. According to the two experts, 90 percent of those images were faked scenes.

HR: What was your criticism for which you are on trial? Knowing what you know now, would you have done anything differently?

PK: We said the video is a forgery. France 2 rejects that the video is a forgery and they’re suing Media-Ratings for defamation. It’s a good idea to have the case on the table. This forgery was done a long time ago and the Israeli government behaved very cowardly. They refused to take steps to have this forgery corrected.

Apart from damaging the Israeli image in the world, it has given a very hard time for Jews all over the world. In Israel, you live with the war every day. In France, we don’t live the Mideast conflict except when it explodes. Jews all over the world suffer because of the Israeli government’s image management. Not only the Jews, but every Westerner suffers from the Dura video. This video was a year before 9/11.

HR: What’s the connection between al-Dura and 9/11?

PK: It’s not direct, but it created the atmosphere. It damaged the image of Western world, not just Israel, and created hate all over the world. This image was shown all over the world. People associate it with the Western world killing the innocent Muslim.

HR: What does France-2 want from you? What’s at stake?

PK: They want us to be condemned for defamation. We could be condemned if the judges think our words were too strong. They could say we wrote too strongly. But it doesn’t change the fact that the video is a forgery. Even if we lose, we’ll keep on saying it’s a forgery. It wouldn’t prove that we were wrong at all.

France-2 is a state company and their annual budget is around 2.5 billion euros. They don’t need our money, but they might want to make us suffer. If they succeed, the day we’re condemned will be a great day for them. They’ll say they were vindicated. They’ll say “We didn’t lie when we said Israeli soldiers killed Mohammed al-Dura.”

HR: What does France-2 stand to lose if you prevail?

PK: If we win and it makes publicity, it’ll be a nightmare for them and for the French establishment. Many people could be fired from their jobs in mainstream media. If they have to apologize and retract the video, it will be a big, big problem for them. So many people supported a certain view of the world, so many people were defending Enderlin and Rahma, it’ll be difficult to apologize without firing hundreds of people. France TV, which owns France-2, is organizing France 24, the French CNN. They’ll do what they can to avoid apologizing.

HR: Why do you think France-2 hasn’t released the full videotape?

PK: If they publish it, it’s game over. They lose their case.

HR: The Mohammed Dura incident was years ago. Why should anyone still care?

PK: This image is carried in everyone’s brain. Everyone thinks it’s true. Daniel Pearl was killed to avenge Dura. [Pearl’s killers] put the image in the video.

The trial will help to clean up the French media and the international media and expose the lies suffered in Lebanon. Remember the Gaza beach lie? Remember the claims of Human Rights Watch? It was publicized on France 2 by the same cameraman, Talal Abu Rahma. He popularized the false claims of HRW.

When sportsmen take drugs, they’re kicked out. I want that the people who are giving fake stories to the public be kicked out. If people are fired, it’ll be a good deterrent for any other bad guy who would like to lie or misrepresent the truth.

HR: How much are your legal expenses?

PK: They’re huge. The expenses are important because we’ve hired high-class lawyers and experts.

HR: Do you expect a fair trial?

PK: A very good question. I hope so. But nothing is sure. It’ll be a very good test to see if there is a future in France for honest, decent people. We’ll see how independent the judicial system is.

HR: How has the French media responded to the proceedings?

PK: Till now, they’re ignoring it. With what occurred in Lebanon and the Gaza beach, some people understand that there are problems with the way some Middle-east fixers give the news. I hope that some people in the mainstream media will pay attention to the story of the trial and treat it honestly. Until now, the French mainstream media treats people like me as if we were crazy revisionists.

HR: What’s the relationship between France 2 and the government?

PK: France TV is owned by the government. France 2 is a subsidiary of France TV, the parent company. The CEO of France TV, Patrick de Carolis is the guy who wrote a book with the wife of Jacques Chirac [Conversation, by Bernadette Chirac]. It was a big success so they made him the head of France TV. It’s completely controlled by the state and the relationships are very strong. The general managers are people close to Chirac. Some of the general managers are people who were working at the government spokesman’s office. It really shows that it is the television of the French government.

HR: What would you like to tell HonestReporting readers?

PK: France cannot be ignored. It’s a small country but it’s important in terms of diplomacy and media. The French government will launch soon France 24. They call it “the French CNN”. It’ll be the voice of the French officials, dispatching ugly messages. For example, you can be sure that they’ll call the people placing car bombs in Iraq or in Israel “resistance fighters.” France can be a big trouble maker in the world because of its media and diplomatic network.