| Submit your comments on this article |
| Europe |
| The Murder of Ilan Halimi : Is Youssouf Fofana the ideal culprit? |
| 2006-03-16 |
| This article is translated from “ Meurtre d’Ilan Halimi : Youssouf Fofana serait-il le responsable idéal ?”, which appeared in Media-Ratings on March 9th. In the aftermath of the murder of Ilan Halimi, the French media have changed their version of the facts several times, obediently following the interpretations dictated by their government. Yet media coverage has still not shed light on the scope of this crime or placed blame the real culprits. Youssouf Fofana and his gangsters are still as guilty as ever: they abducted Ilan Halimi, tortured him and abandoned him to his death along the railroad tracks. People are not born racist, anti-Semitic or anti-French. These perverted feelings are kindled and encouraged. Those who have fuelled such hatred owe an explanation to French citizens who are now suffering the consequences an explanation. Today, there is growing awareness that anyone anywhere can be the victim of extreme violence. In October 2005, Jean-Claude Irvoas was lynched, was lynched in October 2005 in a working-class suburb on the outskirts of Paris right before the eyes of his wife and daughter because he was taking pictures of street lamps. An anti-Semitic crime The media have been doing a lot of beating around the bush to avoid addressing the anti-Semitic nature of this crime As soon as we found out that the victim of this crime was Jewish, that the gang’s other kidnapping attempts mainly targeted Jews, plus some additional facts Ilan Halimi’s family had revealed, there could be no doubt about its anti-Semitic motive. Yet the press held out until, first, the Israeli daily Haaretz published an interview of Mrs Halimi on February 20 2006, to the dismay of the French Foreign Office and, second, the Public Prosecutor stated that the charge of anti-Semitism as an aggravating circumstance would be retained. We could also mention our own modest contribution to this acknowledgement in our newsletter (February 17 2006). At this phase in our analysis, the first question we should ask is : why did the press only disclose the truth under external pressure? Most of the time, despite corroborating data, the press chose to play down the racist nature of this crime. For example, the television program Arrêt sur images on March 11 2006 presented a biased panel. The program’s host, Daniel Schneidermann – who had minimized the anti-Semitic nature of this crime in the daily newspaper Libération, invited like-minded Piotr Smolar, a journalist from Le Monde, and Esther Benbassa, who had already written about the crime in the Communist daily newspaper L’Humanité on February 22 2006 – A call for caution «– and referred to Ilan Halimi on TV channel France 5 as « this guy ». The host of Arrêt sur images invited Michel Zerbib from the Jewish radio station Radio J to counter this threesome. One of the main arguments put forth by the advocates of the kidnap-for-ransom theory is that since some of the people threatened by the Barbarians were not Jewish, the murder of Ilan Halimi could not be considered an anti-Semitic crime. Well, if we follow this logic, Hitler was not anti-Semitic either because most of the people he killed were not Jews… In the meantime, in view of the evidence, international coverage did not suffer from such qualms: the BBC website ran the headline « Leader of anti-Jewish gang arrested » and El Pais reported « Anti-Semitic barbarism in Paris ». Why did some people want to deny that this crime was anti-Semitic? It is important for French diplomacy, whose positions are somewhat weakened abroad at the moment, to deny the existence of anti-Semitism in France. And French diplomats and leading politicians imagine there is an international Jewish lobby, which they believe is based in the United States and strongly influences world politics. That’s why French leaders are deferential toward the leaders of the Jewish American community whom they actually scorn. Moreover, contrary to what everyone keeps repeating, this murder is not the first of its kind in France. In November 2003, Sébastien Sellam, a young Jew, was also murdered. His Muslim neighbor, Adel, slit his throat, gouged out his eyes, and then said: “I’ve killed my Jew, I will go to paradise.” The murderer was placed in a psychiatric ward and will probably be discharged soon. Then, too, the press played down the anti-Semitic motive of this crime. The murder of Ilan Halimi is also an anti-French and anti-Western crime. This crime is anti-Semitic, but it is also anti-French and anti-Western. Ilan Halimi’s abductors deliberately tortured him and used him to stage scenes previously seen on the French news about Iraq. This suggests an absurd revenge motive. Why do French journalists keep using the term « torture » when referring to treatment of Abou Ghraib prisoners while in fact they are humiliations, admittedly despicable, but still humiliations? Didn’t these semantic slips and false interpretations give Ilan Halimi’s torturers’ the idea of revenge? Nurtured on a twisted version of events in Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel, and even in France, some have come to the conclusion that it was acceptable for Ilan Halimi to be tortured and murdered. A portrayal of Muslims as victims, sustained by biased news in the media, has sparked spreading anti-French and anti-Western hatred, which is most likely just at its beginnings. Jacques Chirac’s capitulation in the face of Muslim extremist threats in the Danish cartoon affair, as well as France’s endless mea culpa with regard to its former colonies, have also contributed to an anti-French climate. How can anyone justify the French media campaigns that likened Napoleon to Hitler and led our « brave » President and Prime Minister to ignore the 200-year anniversary of the Battle of Austerlitz, only to celebrate our defeat in Waterloo with the British instead? Falsifications of the interview of Youssouf Fofana on i-TELE On February 27 2006, i-TELE, which is Canal +’s news channel broadcast on cable TV, aired an interview of Youssouf Fofana in which he freely expressed himself. We will not to dwell on the channel’s explanations as to why they broadcast the interview. Their statements have been contradictory on several occasions. However, one of our readers noticed that i-TELE falsified this interview. Although Youssouf Fofana was answering in French and was perfectly audible, false subtitles were added. The i-TELE reporter : «What have you got to say to Ilan’s family? » Youssouf Fofana : « That their child fought back. » But i-TELE subtitled : « That I didn’t kill their child. » Why did i-TELE alter Fofana’s message? What’s most surprising is that none of the journalists who commented on this interview mention the falsified subtitle. Canal + (group including i-TELE) similarly falsified subtitles of insults thrown at Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy during the French riots in November 2005. While Nicolas Sarkozy was in fact called a « dirty Jew », which was perfectly audible for television viewers, Canal +’s newscast Le Vrai Journal preferred to subtitle the chants with: « Sarkozy fascist ». Click here to view video The February 26 2006 demonstration Following the murder of Ilan Halimi, a demonstration was held in Paris on February 26 2006. This march was undermined by political hijacking. Several politicians who should never have been there turned up at the march. For instance, how can we accept to demonstrate alongside Minister of Culture Renaud Donnedieu de Vabres who has been manoeuvring for over one year to hide the truth about the Enderlin – France 2 – Al Dura affair (video scoop of a dying Palestinian child now thought to be a fake), and who lied to the French National Assembly to cover the forgery? It is noteworthy to recall that this forged film triggered a worldwide anti-Semitic campaign, in particular in the French banlieues. Why did the Socialist Party and its satellite organizations, including SOS Racisme and the Union des Etudiants Juifs de France, disrupt the demonstration by ostracizing right wing party leader Philippe de Villiers who has never said anything anti-Semitic or racist? Why does Ilan Halimi’s family have the same lawyer as President Jacques Chirac ? Mr. Francis Szpiner is the Halimi family’s lawyer. If the information we have about the Halimi family is correct, they can not afford the services of Mr Szpiner, who is a famous Parisian lawyer. It is of interest to note that Mr Szpiner is one of Jacques Chirac’s personal lawyers. Has Jacques Chirac put his personal lawyer at the Halimi family’s disposal? And if so, what for ? What does the French President fear might happen with a lawyer he can not control? Why didn’t the media question the police operations? Police operations were deficient in this case. They did not manage to trace or track down the kidnappers throughout the three weeks of Ilan Halimi’s abduction. Why didn’t the media question the police operations? When the police were accused of chasing two teenage boys who were later found dead in the relay station of a high-voltage transformer in Clichy sous Bois on the outskirts of Paris – the incident that triggered the French riots in November 2005 -- media coverage actively investigated to determine the role of the police in their death. Why did the French police force conceal Ilan Halimi’s abduction throughout the three weeks ? Was their discretion motivated by political pressure? The culprits With regard to Ilan Halimi’s dramatic death, we need to ask who is behind this upsurge of hatred. Who gave Youssouf Fofana and his gangsters the idea that a Jew was a better prey for ransom? Who gave this gang of barbarians the idea that it was acceptable for people, whether Jewish or not, to be tortured and murdered because they are French? The answer is simple: biased news coverage from certain media outlets, subservient to the French Foreign Office and/or infiltrated by the Far Left allied with Muslim fundamentalists, has bred a climate of anti-Semitic and anti-Western hatred in France. Is the growing impact in France of the most dangerous Muslim fundamentalist groups really a surprise when we know that Nicolas Sarkozy, the current Interior Minister, nominated a member of the UOIF (French Union of Muslim Organizations, closely linked to the Muslim Brotherhood) vice-president of the French Muslim Council ? Why did former Prime Minister Mr. Raffarin’s government, and in particular Dominique Perben who was then Minister of Justice, refuse to put into practice the recommendations in the Rufin Report, including a law to penalize anti-Zionism? What would we say if the media in a foreign country regularly allowed advocates of the destruction of France to voice their opinions? Didn’t biased news in L’Humanité or on France 2 concerning conflicts in Iraq and the Middle East contribute to forging the mentalities of Ilan Halimi’s torturers? Why don’t reporters investigate the everyday brutality that prevails in French working-class suburbs ? Did this kind of terrorism scare neighbors in Bagneux into keeping quiet about what they had most likely seen or heard during Ilan Halimi’s detention? Some journalists have gone so far as to call the neighbors’ behavior a kind of omerta. And what about these same media outlets that still haven’t disclosed the truth about the faked video aired on France 2 on September 30 2000, which has been fueling anti-Semitic and anti-Western hatred throughout the Islamic world ever since? Biased news/Disinformation is a crime, and those who cover it are its accomplices. |
| Posted by:anonymous5089 |