No, really. I could get rich — from my reading … so far… of the Al Dura Verdict in which Phillippe Karsenty has been ordered to pay 3000 Euros to Charles Enderlin and a symbolic 5 Euros to France 2 for “insulting” them. These days I get insulted about once an hour. Just think about the possibilities, even deducting legal fees. But seereeusly folks – there’s something very spooky about this Al Dura business. As we all know Karsenty was merely expressing a view of the Al Dura video – that it was unabashed fauxtography – that he been expressed by many. In this post-Reuters era, most honest people would find such a video at least suspicious. [But we're not talking about honest people.-ed. We're talking about the... Don't say it!] Okay, I’m not moving. This sure does make you think about French statist corruption, doesn’t it? If you have been following Nidra Poller’s coverage on Pajamas Media, you would have thought this trial was headed for a victoire for la justice. Mais non. Something happened between trial and verdict. Did “people” talk with the judge? Was a “consensus” reached that would not offend France 2? Will we ever know? Unlikely.
You’re moving to France? I never going to France.
You can’t insult the media? Next thing you know they’ll say you can’t insult politicians and then what is left for conversation?
I figured there’d be trouble when Ms. Poller described the judge’s demeanor – fair and polite and concerned, etc., etc. That, plus the perfunctory work by the France 2′s legal team sounded to me like the fix was in before the opening gavel to order.
Poor France.
Agree with mrp above. I too read Nidra Poller’s account, was encourged by it to think that truth and justice would prevail, and failed to read the prosecution’s perfunctory behavior as a sign that the fix was in long before the trial.
How many millennia before Europe’s next Enlightenment? When’s the next Voltaire?
Hi Roger,
We’ve been trying to touch bases with you for several weeks now. Please, if you have a moment, call Jeffrey Epstein at “ATF”.
Now for something completely different;
America’s Truth Forum and Jeff Epstein are hosting a “SkypeCast” this evening (Thursday, 19 October) at 9:00PM EST (U.S.)
to discuss the “America Hiroshima” scenario and other subjects related to the Islamic Jihad against Western civilisation. This is an opportunity to hear the facts of the case from the original investigative researchers and those who broke the story. Since the revelations of the Al Qaeda plot became public “Mainstream Media” has twisted and embellished the original report beyond recognition. We hope to set the record straight this evening.
We hope to receive your input, and that of your readership this evening.
We would also appreciate it if you would announce the Skypecast on your Blog.
Kol tuv,
Michael
America’s Truth Forum
American Hiroshima
Hosted by Truthforum1
Starts October 19, 21:00
Are Al-Qaida plotting a nuclear attack on American soil? Bloggers and others are invited to discuss the “American Hiroshima” scenario with noted author Dr.Paul Williams (Former advisor to the FBI)and Jeffrey M. Epstein, investigative researcher and founder of “America’s Truth Forum”. “According to captured terrorist documents, the “American Hiroshima” calls for the multiple detonation of nuclear weapons already in the possession of Osama bin Laden’s operatives currently inside the U.S….”
Related Web address
http://www.americastruthforum.com/index.html
Thank God for our First Amendment rights in this country. It’s only reading about some travesty of justice in benighted areas like France (and frequently places like Belgium, etc., that don’t have free speech codified into their constitutions) that cast the differences between our system and theirs in sharp relief.
I guess the judge was just saying, “Apres moi, le Eurabie.”
Bon chance, France. You’re gonna need it.
This travesty is something to remember the next time you hear a US Supreme Court Justice or a legislator wax poetic about the glories of European law.
Are you telling me that the bloggers that discovered the “fake but accurate” memo from CBS would have been held liable under French law?
This one is a head scratcher.
The Media, here and abroad, operate as if they’re above the law. Maybe they are.
Whatever constitutional dodges the Media choose, would we dare to prosecute any of the main MSM here?
I recall the BBC and its bureaucracy (2004?) rejecting publicly any findings,after being found guilty of –to my mind– trying to bring down the Blair government with fake journalism.
To whom do the Media answer..
This is simply another reminder that France is finished. Will the last person leaving kindly turn off the lights?
One of the more entertaining aspects of this blog is Roger’s wry struggle with his inner self, and ours.
Thanks
“Something happened between trial and verdict. Did “people” talk with the judge? Was a “consensus” reached that would not offend France 2?”
Are you questioning the judge’s integrity? How dare you. No moving to France for you.
What? No foie gras? Je suis desolé.
The only problem with France is it’s run by the French…
What? No foie gras? Je suis desolÈ.
Guess Chicago is out, then.
Wasn’t there a Michener novel (QB7?) where one of the protagonists wins a high profile court case but only gets $1 for his damaged “reputation”?
That was seen as a lawyerly slam in the face in that novel…am I wrong to see it as a slam to France 2 in this trial?
Actually, the US is probably unique in its understanding of defamation — that, particularly where pubic figures are concerned, if an allegation, spoken or published is, more or less demonstrably true, it’s not defamatory. For most of the rest of the world — the common law jurisdictions of the UK and its former dominions like Canada, and the codified laws jurisdictions like France, it’s defamation if its said with the intent to harm a reputation, even if the allegation is substantially and demonstrably true.