I was pleased to open the internet news site of news.com.au and find this article.Â It was flanked with the banner on the front page with the text “Iconic Footage may have been a Hoax, Fact or Fiction?”
The headline itself is unusual, given the court has categorically given the answer:Â “Fiction”.Â There is no “may” about it.Â The headline should have been “Court rules Iconic Footage was a Hoax”.
However the article from Piers Akerman is spot on, and covers the salient points.Â For example the video evidence shows the boy got up after he was supposedly dead.Â Even after the court demanded that all the available footage be shown, it was still not displayed to the court.Â But there was categorical proof in the evidence provided that this was nothing more that a hollywood style media makeup.Â
At the time of the incident I suggested this and was flamed.Â However this incident has been used by Palenstinians to justify violence and define their struggle.Â They have named streets and soccor tournaments after Al-Dura.Â They have used his image to cynically portray Israeli soldiers as cold blooded killers.Â The damage done is irrepairable, even if the truth now emerges.Â
I felt vindicated by reading the news online this morning.Â I’m now off to buy the West Australian.Â Given that they posted this modern day blood libel in the same way that it was syndicated around the rest of the world, I hope to see their coverage of theÂ FrenchÂ court decision too.Â