Since the launch, in May 2019, of Global Watch Analysis and Screen Watch magazine – which define themselves as progressive, secular and humanist media, dedicated to resist fanaticism – we have placed the fight against antisemitism at the heart of our struggles. This is demonstrated by dozens of surveys, interviews and editorials published by Ian Hamel, Martine Gozlan, Jean-Marie Montali and Atmane Tazaghart.
However, for months, each time we publish a survey or poll on issues linked to Islamism or the defense of secularism, slander campaigns orchestrated by the Muslim Brotherhood movement, its media relays and its ‘‘useful idiots’’, particularly within the left woke movement, attack us, by peddling fake news according to which Global Watch Analysis and Screen Watch are reactionary media, belonging to the fascist sphere, Islamophobic, conspiratorial and antisemitic. And this on the pretext that their founder and editorial director, Atmane Tazaghart, was fired in 2016 from his position as editor-in-chief of the Arabic-speaking editorial staff of France 24, for comments described as Islamophobic, conspiratorial and antisemitic!
Besides the fact that it is not easy to be both Islamophobic and antisemitic, the case relating to his accusations was decided by the courts. A judgment rendered on June 21, 2018, in favor of Atmane Tazaghart – of which we are publishing the full facsimile here, for the sake of transparency (Click on this link to read the entire Judgment) – established that it was a cabal orchestrated by colleagues of whom Mr. Tazaghart denounced actions inciting religious hatred, contrary to the principle of secularism applicable to French public media.
Indeed, in April 2016, during the election of the SoJ of France 24, Mr. Tazaghart denounced the entryism of Arabic-speaking journalists linked to the Muslim Brotherhood, intervening to guide votes according to religious and ethnic affiliations. Around twenty journalists from the Arabic-speaking editorial staff of France 24 testified – before a bailiff – to the veracity of the facts denounced by Mr. Tazaghart, which led the management of France 24 to launch an investigation.
To light a counter-fire, the incriminated journalists dug up an old interview, dating from September 2013, given by Mr. Tazaghart to a Lebanese channel in Arabic, at the request of the management of France 24. A video containing extracts from this interview, edited, truncated and translated into French in a deliberately falsified manner, was published on YouTube. It was accompanied by a title and a presentation, without any link with the original content of the interview, to give the impression that Mr. Tazaghart made controversial comments, sometimes described as Islamophobic, sometimes as conspiratorial and antisemitic.
This video was taken up by community media described by the judgment rendered in favor of Mr. Tazaghart in June 2018 as “publications of dubious origin or very politically oriented”. And the judgment adds that ‘‘the Council notes that there is indeed a direct link between the denunciation of unethical and discriminatory actions of 2 colleagues by Mr. Tazaghart, the broadcast of the video whose translation is subject to caution, and his dismissal”. As a result, the judges ordered the annulment of Mr. Tazaghart’s dismissal considering that it “therefore presents the double circumstance of being both an attack on his freedom of expression, a fundamental freedom, and an attack on his right alert for discrimination”.
In the dismissal letter and during the trial, the management of France 24 never accused Mr. Tazaghart of having made conspiratorial or antisemitic remarks. She simply mentioned “a divergence on the editorial line”, criticizing Mr. Tazaghart for placing himself “on the terrain of opinion” and not on that “of information”. But the judgment refuted this argument, finding that Mr. Tazaghart “is sanctioned for having expressed his opinions, without the demonstration of a manifest disturbance of public order or an abuse of his freedom of expression”.
The court also condemned the management of France 24 for ‘‘contractual disloyalty’’, due to its failure to fulfill its obligation to protect Mr. Tazaghart, as the Company Agreement commits it to do, ‘‘at the occasion of numerous unjustified accusations generated by publications of dubious origin or very politically oriented regarding the interview given in 2013, the content of which is truncated, taken out of context and the translation deliberately erroneous’’.
Atmane Tazaghart therefore never made any conspiratorial or antisemitic comments. However, the management of France 24, which only criticized him for a simple divergence on the editorial line, never agreed to reinstate him in his role as editor-in-chief, as ordered by the judgment of June 21, 2018. During a summary hearing with the Court of Appeal, the management of France 24 mentioned a risk of attacks against the channel, if Mr. Tazaghart was reinstated, due to his anti-Islamist positions. Going so far as to draw up a shameful list of media outlets having suffered attacks in France, from the OAS attacks to that of Charlie Hebdo!
Last September, the case was brought before the European Court of Human Rights.