BITTER MEDICINE

BITTER MEDICINE

Mistress Gatta • 19 באוק׳ 2004

Bitter Medicine
Inserting anti-Israel rhetoric into ostensibly neutral medical journals and academic literature

Two reputable medical journals recently allowed crude anti-Israel propaganda to masquerade on their pages as legitimate academic discourse:

1) The British Medical Journal ― hailed by the Financial Times as 'one of the world's top four general medical journals' ― included in its Oct. 16 issue an article entitled 'Palestine: The assault on health and other war crimes.' The author, Dr. Derrick Summerfield, compares the IDF's acts to those of the 9/11 terrorist hijackers:

The Israeli army, with utter impunity, has killed more unarmed Palestinian civilians since September 2000 than the number of people who died on September 11, 2001.

The only actual similarity between the two is the death count ― approximately 3,000. Summerfield labels all Palestinian casualties 'unarmed civilians' ― denying the fact that (1) the clear majority of Palestinians who have died since September 2000 were terrorists and armed combatants (according to the Institute for Counter-Terrorism), and (2) no Palestinian civilian has been deliberately killed 'with impunity' ― in stark contrast to 9/11.

Summerfield goes on to claim that since some Palestinian minors have died from wounds to the upper body and head:

Clearly, soldiers are routinely authorised to shoot to kill children in situations of minimal or no threat.

Beyond falsely branding Israel as guilty of 'war crimes,' deliberate child-killing, illegal colonization and apartheid, the article makes absolutely no mention of how Palestinian terror and political corruption have contributed to the unfortunate state of the Palestinian heath system.

If you agree this article is inappropriate for a respected medical journal, send comments to British Medical Journal editor Kamran Abbasi: click here

2) The June 2004 edition of Diabetes Voice ― a quarterly publication of the International Diabetes Federation ― included a report on that disease in the Gaza Strip. Here's the abstract, which appeared in bold print at the top of the article:

The year 2003 marked the 55th anniversary of the Nakba (cataclysm) of the Palestinian people. In 1948, according to the United Nations Conciliation Commission, 760,000 Palestinians were evicted from their cities and villages, hundreds of which were razed to the ground. What remains of the Palestinian people's land is now split between the West Bank of the river Jordan and Qita Ghazzah (Gaza Strip), and remains occupied by Israeli military forces and settlers. In 2003, the second uprising, or Al-Aqsa Intifada against this occupation entered its third year. Panagiotis Tsapogas, Medical Co-ordinator of the Greek section of Mdecins Sans Frontires (Doctors Without Borders) in Gaza, 2002-2003, reports on the difficulties faced by Palestinian people with diabetes in Gaza, and makes a call for the provision of improved diabetes care in the region.

NGO-Monitor, which promotes accountability of non-governmental organizations active in the Mideast conflict, responded:

This short abstract consists of a blatantly political attack that has little or nothing to do with diabetes. The one-sided and highly distorted version of history that is presented is based on the Palestinian version of events and vocabulary, and immorally ignores the brutality of Palestinian terrorism. It is also entirely inconsistent with the goals proclaimed by Diabetes Voice, the International Diabetes Federation, and Medecins Sans Frontires.

The International Diabetes Federation (known, ironically, as the IDF) published an official apology for the abstract quoted above, and the editor-in chief of the journal resigned over the matter. The abstract was re-written for the publication's archived, website version of the article.

* * *

Not only medical journals have contributed to this disturbing trend of inserting anti-Israel rhetoric into ostensibly neutral academic literature.

Academe, the journal of the American Association of University Professors, included an update on Palestinian universities in its Sept.-Oct. 2004 issue (see it here - scroll down to the grey box). While lamenting the 'infamous 'segregation wall'' and roadblocks that limit access to Palestinian schools, author Mary Gray cites Ramallah's BirZeit University as an example.

Gray gives no explanation whatsoever why Israel implemented these strictures ― to deny terrorists free access to Israel. Moreover, Gray ignores the fact that BirZeit is one of the very centers of Palestinian incitement to terror ― Hamas won a recent student body election there by featuring exploding models of Israeli buses and claims of prowess based on its success in killing more Israelis than the other parties.

If you agree that this review of the state of Palestinian higher education lacked appropriate balance, send comments to Academe: academe@aaup.org

robroy​(נשלט) • 26 באוק׳ 2004

I'd like to add a point of view which may not be directly part of this,but still doing with Israel and it's conflict-inner and out.
The Israeli cabinet-Knesset-is supposed to vote today about the disengagemnt from Gaza strip.PM Ariel Sharon who's pushing this for a long time is expected to get the majority of the votes of the 120 MK's to pass the rule on 1st vote.This is a step forward,not the end of the way by far.
The majority of the Israeli public wants out of Gaza Strip.We are tired of the need to support settlements that are costing us so much,risking lives of the settlers and the children and the IDF troops guarding them,while the funds could be used to better purposes.We are getting out-if and when it happens-unilatterally,which has it's pluses and minuses like everything in life.. the minus is we actually get nothing concrete in return.The plus is that geting out this way we are not committing not to get back in with military forces,if needed,if the Hamas gets closer to our cities to fire Quassam rockets.The palestinians don't like us getting out this way,as we are not taking terms and conditions from them.
The Israeli nation mostly wants out.we're tired of being there because of a messianic
complex ,that Gaza is ours because god promised it to us in the bible and so on.The facts are it is an occupied teritory since 1967,and not included in the green line asagreed in Rhodes in the cease fire lines.Gaza Strip is 350 sq.kms.of bad news,which we don't need and want,and are tired of settlers numbering 1700 families and their followers telling us what to do and where to pour bilions and billions.
Enough is enough.And now rabbies are calling soldiers to refure orders to evacuate settlers from Gaza strip.This is a very dangerous step as it tears religious soldiers apart between their need to follow orders and rabbies talking in begalf "the whole Israel" and the area between Jordan River to the sea. This should not be allowed,ever.
The arguments between the right and left are strong and bitter.I don't take this as a left or right but a sthe fact that we can no longer be there out of religious fanatic reasons,not giving a dam about the outcomes.
I hear debates if there will be a civil war,or as we call it "brother's war-Milchemet Achim.Personally,I think it's here already.I'm hoping that when the day comes,assuming it does,there will be no use of arms against soldiers and police officers.

read this

Mistress Gatta • 27 באוק׳ 2004

check this out- it would have been sooo funny if it was not sooooo sad


Guzofsky yesterday posted signs in Jerusalem that feature a fake advertisement for joining the unit. ( to take care of settlers)

"Wanted," the signs read, "Non-Jews living in Israel who wish to join a huge and exciting anti-Semitic project. ... Needed: dynamic, motivated, violent and healthy soldiers, preferably without any special sympathy for Jews and without strong patriotic feelings toward the Land of Israel, who are seeking a challenge that offers the opportunity to take out your aggressions on Jew boys.

Together we stand, divided we fall

in re vote- my personal opinion, and may be i have no right

Mistress Gatta • 27 באוק׳ 2004

well, there is no good answer for this one
I have few points- if in 1948 Arabs would agree to what was given, there would be no problems today. On the other hand Israel agreed too to those borders, and would not start the war to get Gaza and West bank.
now 1967- lots of accusations why territories were not returned although being claimed as temporally holdings to create peace. And to whom those territories should have been given back- there were no one there to negotiate or give back too, remember?
And do you know any other country that after winning the war gives away territories? Only Israel!!!!
Now Gaza and West bank- I understand it is costly to protect unprotectable, and it is much easier to give it up- but who are u giving it to? When Sinai was returned to Egypt there was a good chance of having peace- Egypt after all in a state with government, economy, etc. Palestinian Authority is nothing- no guarantees that troops will be right back after settlements are destroyed.... Now the only thing that would protect is fence... but is it ready?
I have no right to tell Israeli government what to do, I'm an American Jew who's heart bleeds every time Israeli men, women and children die, so if the withdrawal from territories would stop it- _I would be sooo happy, but at this point I see no guarantees ..

robroy​(נשלט) • 30 באוק׳ 2004

Israel didn't really start the 6 day war at 1967.We were provoked by Egypt when their prsident at the time,Nasser,closed Tiran Bay(the word 'bay' is not the right one excatly,I don't know which is correct).There were moves of our neighboring countries militaries so we had to engage into war.We were provoked.
As for giving Sinai back,it was for peace with Egypt as you correctly mentioned.
What is taking place now in Gaza strip is impossible for Israel to deal with.There are there 1.2 million palestines,more or less,the most crowded area in the world,and they sorrund a jewish minority of fanatics who are there because it's our holy land and so on...see my points from the last time I wrote.They pose to us a real demographic threat and we know that the only thing is two states to two nations,we can't affod being a state for both Israeli/Jews and Palestnians,as in 10-20 years we'll be a minority in them which we will any way but better separated than mixed with them.The whole concept of 'one big Israel,from the river to the sea' is senseless and nonesense.History in other places shows two nations can't share the same land,we need to cut this once and for all.I totally agree with PM Sharon on his moves do disengage from Gaza and part of the West bank.Even now if Arafat dies and a new sainer leadership rises which we can talk too-the hate will be there.Separation is needed and Israel can't give in to fanatics.Poles show about 70-80 percent of Israelis agree we need this to happen.