Palestinian Fairy Tales

[From the Times of Israel by David Katz.]


In 1917 in a village in the north of England, two young cousins named Elsie Wright and
Frances Griffiths borrowed the quarter plate camera of Elsie’s father Arthur Wright – one of
England’s earliest qualified electrical engineers.

When he went to develop the pictures, Mr. Wright got more than his daughter playing with her
friends, instead, he saw fairies. A rational man, he dismissed them as fake, and banned his
daughter from using the camera again, however Elsie’s mother had very different ideas.

In 1919 when she made the images public, the famous writer of Sherlock Holmes, Sir Arthur
Conan Doyal wrote in a leading magazine of the picture’s authenticity. And so, with popular
distribution, and recognized approval of leaders of the day – the legend was set, and the fairytale
became a reality.

It was not until the early 1980’s that the cousins admitted that the pictures were fakes; Frances
said ‘I don’t see how people could believe they’re real fairies. I could see the backs of them and the
hatpins when the photo was being taken.”

Fast forward 83 years to September 30, 2000, and the start of the second Palestinian ‘Intifada.’
France2 TV broadcast footage of an episode that occurred earlier that day at Netzarim Junction in
the Gaza Strip. The footage was by a Palestinian stringer — a freelancer — named Talal Abu
Rahma, who claimed that even though the incident occurred over the course of an hour and
numerous other cameramen were around who had not witnessed it, he alone had captured
footage of a young Palestinian boy cowering behind his father, being shot to death by the Israeli
army.

Charles Enderlin, France2 Jerusalem bureau chief, who during the incident had been more than
100 kilometers away in Ramallah, edited and added commentary to the piece that went out that
night on France2, and then on networks and news outlets across the world, as the tale of
Mohammed al-Dura went from being legend to history.

Yet even then, doubts over the authenticity of the footage were raised, as American professor Richard Landes labeled it a classic case of Palestinian media manipulation, or ‘Pallywood’. This is a brief description of the events that took place that have led to where we are 13 years later.

Indeed, the research into and debate around the incident has filled the web and even impacted
upon the French legal system. The website aldurah.com chronicles the incredible efforts of Prof.
Landes and French media analyst Philippe Karsenty to prove this modern day blood libel was a
staged fake.

However, as a photographer and imagery consultant, this image and its use over the past 13
years has been key to my motivation to use every bit of knowledge and experience I have to show
how imagery is being used so effectively in the campaign to delegitimize the State of Israel.
It is said that the camera never lies. Whoever coined that term could not have been more
misinformed. As a photographer of nearly 30 years, I can tell you that any half decent photographer
can make a camera do anything he or she wants.

First of all the viewer is only seeing a tiny portion of the wider field of view, then depending on the
type of lens used and the angle of the camera, and how the photographer positions themselves,
can alter the perspective and reality of any situation.

That is even before all the options in post production, where, even before digital cameras and
Photoshop, pictures could be altered in any number of ways by darkroom technicians.
I have conducted a wider study on this called Shattered Lens.

The same goes for television cameras, and editors who have even more ways of altering how a
scene and chain of events can look and be altered for personal agendas.

Without being fully aware of this, and the use, abuse and manipulation of imagery, the Israeli Army
and the Government learned a very harsh lesson that day. At the time, they admitted to something
Israel had not done, without checking the facts or having the ability to challenge the authenticity of
the France2 images in real time. In doing so, it allowed the image to become one of the most
powerful pieces of propaganda in the history of photographic imagery, and the biggest fake since
the Cottingley Fairies.

The moment the al-Dura image hit the screens it became iconic, and while a picture is worth a
thousand words, this one cost a thousand lives.

It is only really due to the persistence of Richard Landes and Phillipe Karsenty and a few others
that fought tooth and nail that we are at the stage we are today, and that the Israeli Government
has investigated and officially denounced the incident as fake.

Unfortunately, the damage is done, no matter what court rulings prove that the images were faked,
the al-Dura image is forever etched in people’s minds, and to this day is still used in the Arab world
to incite violence, and will continue to be.

The best we can do is hope at least we learned from it, as now with the advent of social media,
this is going to become an even greater issue that we have to deal with, as images are being
posted instantaneously across the world. In order for us to be able to challenge staged imagery we
need to have experts at hand in the form of a dedicated imagery monitoring unit – something I
have been advocating for years – to be able to identify and highlight fake or staged imagery, and
deal with it in real-time, rather than once the damage is irreparable.

The father of photojournalism, Henri Cartier-Bresson once said, “Our job is to view events with a
clinical eye and to record them, but not to distort them by means of tricks, either while shooting or
in the darkroom.” It is our job to hold the media to this proper and correct standard.

Return to the Anti-Semitism Report

Matt already commented upon the US State Department (hardly an organization with an agenda) reporting that anti-Semitism is on the increase worldwide. The Huffington Post readership continued to prove this wasn't true by spouting anti-Semitism of their own, and now that we have given the moderators plenty of time to not delete the comments, let's see what remains:

(I know this was in Matt's original post, but in the 24 hours since then as you can see it bloomed to 8 favorites despite its blatantly anti-Semitic nature.)

Huffington Post approved, as always.

Mohammad Al-Dura Thread Turns Into Blatant Holocaust-Baiting

Just when I think we are getting accustomed to the hatred on the HP, the anti-Zionist crowd kicks it up to a new level. Zach already commented about how the fully moderated Al-Dura thread soon got filled by Israel haters running interference for the lies, but that didn't last long. Soon, however, the thread turned into one of the most anti-Semitic we have seen in a while. I guess Palestinian lies just have a way of bringing out the worst in people. And as if that wasn't enough, Holocaust baiting soon followed.

Let's begin with a prominent anti-Zionist saying that the Israelis should "go back to their homeland in Auschwitz." None of his fellow travelers criticized him:

Calls for genocide? Well, it's against Jews, so the HP will publish it and it'll get some favorites. But most of the rest of it just took the form of classic "moral equivalence:"

As you can see, it was "Nazi" this and "Nazi" that, over and over again. And if all that wasn't enough, let's conclude with what seems to be Holocaust denial, since "Tony Andrews" here seems to think that educating people about it is tantamount to "indoctrination:"

All, of course, are Huffington Post approved.

Israel vs Syria, HPers Side With Syria (Again)

Check out yesterday's Huffington Post "World" headline:

Pretty dramatic, for a story in which no one appears to have been killed nor anyone's stuff broken. Anyway, the top favorited comments rushed to bash Israel, as always. It wasn't long before thinly veiled anti-Semitism showed up as well:

Welcome to the Huffington Post.

More Sympathy for the Devil from the HuffPost

This story may seem innocuous:

But as Matt and I have pointed out many, many times before, the Huffington Post has some serious trouble making Israelis look sympathetic even when people are murdering them. Check out the contrast between this picture:

And then this one, the only Israeli funeral picture we have seen in three years:

It's pretty sad that the Huffington Post has the same kind of picture for innocent people blown up in Bulgaria as they do for Hezbollah terrorists fighting for the jihad in Syria.

News the HP Doesn't Cover: Palestinian Abuses Up

A Palestinian report has been released on the amount of abuse inflicted by the PA and Hamas. Fascinating reading. Too bad the HP readership will never see it:

A Palestinian report shows human rights abuses by the rival governments in the West Bank and Gaza are on the rise.

The Palestinian Independent Commission for Human Rights said in its annual report Tuesday that incidents of abuse are up 10% since last year.
Director Ahmed Harb said, “Most of the complaints were on torture, mistreatment, preventing and dispersing public assemblies, preventing reporters from reporting or arresting them.”
The report said the rift between Palestinian factions is a main cause.Hamas oustedFatah forces from Gaza in 2007 and took power. The Fatah-dominated Palestinian Authority rules the West Bank.

The report said there were seven extrajudicial killings of alleged Israelicollaborators in Gaza, and two Palestinians died in West Bank jails.

Talking Point Combat: Beating the "Right" of Return

Now that the fighting between Israel and the Palestinians has eased off slightly, the Palestinian propagandists have returned to one of their demands, the so called "right" of return. With the recognition of the "State of Palestine" last November, though, it's easier than ever to form a logical argument beating this demand.

Before we begin, make sure your opponent is aware of what the Palestinian "right" of return demands: Free passage into Israel for all Palestinians who fled during the 1948 war and their descendants. In other words, every single person who identifies as a Palestinian must be allowed to move to Israel whether Israel wants them or not.

1. Universal Declaration of Human Rights

The first step in any argument about this is to demand a citation from your opponent as to why they believe the Palestinians even have a right of return to anywhere. One citation is the 4th Geneva Convention, which we'll get to later, but another is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

The UDHR states quite clearly that:

"[e]veryone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each State. Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.""

Pretty straightforward right? There's only one problem: Israel is not the Palestinians' country. That is literally all you have to say. The Palestinians' country at the time of partition was the British Mandate of Palestine, and that doesn't exist anymore. The Palestinians are not Israelis, they don't hold Israeli citizenship, they have never lived in the state of Israel, and they don't even consider themselves to be Israelis. In fact they claim to be a proud, noble nation of "Palestinians" that has exited for 1,400 years. How can anyone make the legal argument that Israel is now the Palestinians' "country"?

If you want to get technical, the UDHR is also a General Assembly resolution and therefore not legally binding.

2. Living in Palestine, still a refugee

What is a refugee? A refugee is, according to international law,

"individuals who:

• are outside their country of nationality or habitual residence;

• have a well-founded fear of persecution because of their race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group or political opinion; and

• are unable or unwilling to avail themselves of the protection of that country, or to return there, for fear of persecution."

What is the Palestinians' country of nationality? Ever since November of 2012, it's clearly Palestine! It's right there in the name: "Palestinian." So all Palestinians living in "Palestine," the West Bank and Gaza Strip, are in fact living INSIDE the country of their nationality. For a Palestinian apologist to make the case Palestinians are even refugees, much less a return of return to some other country besides their own, they need to legally prove Palestinians are not Palestinian. Good luck with that. Furthermore, their place of habitual residence has been the West Bank and Gaza for going on forty years now, so even if you claim that Palestinians are actually Israelis, it doesn't matter.

Keeping that in mind, there is a plethora of refugee law that could help the Palestinians "return" somewhere, but none of it is applicable because they aren't legally refugees.

And don't worry if UNRWA and the UN still considers them to be refugees, that just shows how biased and corrupt the UN is. Nor are the opinions of UNRWA legally binding.

3. Principle of states "getting" the population on them when they form

Some Palestinian propagandists will claim that when one state dissolves and another takes its place, that state "gets" the population of the first state automatically. There is nothing in international law that I have found to support this, but even if it's true, when the state of Palestine was created in November 2012, by that same principle it should get the population in the territory it controls. After all, we wouldn't expect Palestine to have different standards of behavior than Israel, right?

Furthermore, the Palestinians rejected the creation of Israel with violence. There is not the slightest indication, even today, that they consider themselves to be citizens of Israel who just want to return to the State of Israel.

4. Law of "state succession"

Other propagandists recently have attempted the claim that the law of "state succession" applies and that is why the Palestinians have a right of return. There is a Wiki article about state succession, and there is an international convention about it, but Israel has not signed onto the convention. Without clearly stated international law that applies to Israel, this argument has no legs.

5. Geneva Convention

A favorite of those making the case for the RoR is the 4th Geneva Convention. But the Geneva Convention has never been applied to any other group of people like this, so there is legal precedent set. The GCs were signed after the Palestinians became "refugees," so Israel cannot be expected to obey an ex post facto law.

But here's what the GC actually says:

"Article 49, which allows a “belligerent occupant” to temporarily evacuate occupied areas but requires that the evacuees:... be transferred back to their homes as soon as hostilities in the area in question have ceased."

If this is the article that the Palestinians are trying to use, then first of all hostilities in the area have not ceased. Second, they would not be considered refugees, they would be considered evacuees. Third, "evacuee" status does not transfer to descendants, so only the people who were evacuated by Israel, not the ones who ran away, not the ones who are their descendants have a right of return. Not good enough.

But even if the Geneva Conventions applied, the Palestinians are the last people to be demanding someone else follow them, since they themselves have treated the Geneva Convention like toilet paper since day one. Nor have they even signed up to the Geneva Convention, so have no legal right to demand its protection.

At the end of the day, Israel simply won't allow the Palestinians back in, no matter what international law says. There's a higher law in effect, the law of survival, that Israel has to follow first. But it's nice to take down these arguments anyway and deflate the haters' sense of self-righteousness.