« B'Tselem's Casualty Count | Main | USA Today's 'most pressing' Mid-East problem »
January 13, 2009
Norwegian Doctors Return from Gaza to Attack their Critics
Mads Gilbert and Erik Fosse have ended their humanitarian mission in Gaza at the height of a reported medical crisis there to return to Norway. They have not, however, ended their anti-Israel propaganda campaign.
In a televised press conference available on Norway's Channel 2 Web site, they urge their critics to "bring it on!"
Come on--bring it on, bring it on! We have nothing to hide, reality is bad enough. Bring it on! This is a huge smear campaign and I can tell you we expect more. We expect more from the Israeli people.
Gilbert accuses Israel of a long, meticulously planned campaign to hide what is happening in Gaza, then congratulates himself for "breaking that plan."
That is the most dangerous thing for us. That we broke that plan.
He suggests that white people have more credibility among Americans than those with darker skin, as he accuses Israel of blocking Fosse's telephone interview with Larry King:
What was that? Well that was a possibility for some white person in Gaza City inside a hospital to talk to the American public.
Eric Fosse adds:
The deliberate efforts to distort information does not come from us. It comes from people with a lot of resources to do it and believe me they do whatever they can to make it up and they inhibit all of you to do your work and they try of course to inhibit us to tell the truth. ..They use every means to stop witnesses, to stop objective information.
Fosse, referring to a UN driver who was shot last Thursday at the Erez crossing, proclaims that the Israelis have shot at UN humanitarian workers and stopped them by force. Of course, the IDF denies having fired on the UN truck and is investigating reports that it was Hamas gunmen who shot at the truck. Fosse makes no mention of this. Nor does he mention the fact that the wounded Palestinians on this truck were evacuated and treated in Ashkelon which itself is the target of Hamas rockets.
Who are the ones deliberately distorting information?
Posted by rh at January 13, 2009 01:34 PM
Comments
From the press conference, Mads Gilbert said:
... Mahmoud was playing on the rooftop of the neighbours place with Achmed Soubali[?] who was 16. And they were asked to play on the rooftop because their house was considered unsafe, the family's house.
Why was was Ashraf's family house considered unsafe? Was it in close proximity to some Hamas military personel, equipment or building? I'm interested to know what Gilbert knows, if anything, as to why the family felt that the neighbour's place (also reported as his cousin) was safe while Ashraf's house was not.
And they were hit by some sort of rocket that exploded on the roof.
The next question is, how does Gilbert know that that it was a rocket that exploded on the roof? Was he told by Ashraf that this is what happened, given that Ashraf was reportedly not at this house when it happened either. Was there anyone else on the roof with the two boys, or were there any neighbours or other observers who saw something that would have led to the conclusion about what caused the explosion? In the broadcast story, Ashraf claims on camera that "The Israeli plane targeted them with small rockets. For them, just for them. And killed both of them." So where is the proof for that allegation, given he was not there at the time?
I know that some commentators have questioned whether or not there were two children on the roof who were killed. But that is not the principal concern of the commentators, but whether the story reflects what exactly went on, whether it actually happened in the manner of which it was described, and whether elements had been distorted in this telling of the story. Each story element has had commentators question whether that element actually happened as it was presented. Unless you believe that serious allegations made in a family tragedy should not be questioned.
The reason for this is that if the story is a true and correct record of what exactly happened, and the whole story without relevant facts left out, then there was an unlawful killing of two civilians. An allegation of a war crime. Serious allegations indeed.
Has Gilbert actually seen the video that was broadcast? Does he think the big concern is only about whether someone did or did not die? Would he consider this video to be an accurate record of the resuscitation attempt, without any staging of a CPR that was not going to assist the patient? And, if a staging was performed, for whose benefit was it done - the family? Ashraf? Was Ashraf and his cameraman actually present during the resuscitation or were they prevented from being in attendance during this time?
Would Gilbert consider a reenactment of emergency room treatment as acceptable? Does he take responsibility for what seems to be a staged medical procedure in front of the camera?
Posted by: Gharkad ![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://blog.camera.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at January 14, 2009 06:29 AM
I hear Mads Gilbert muttering " exteme bradycardia " on the Ch 4 video, while looking at the cardiac monitor then indicating the CPR to be stopped and covering the boy's head.
Bradycardia is a medical term which means that the heart is beating slowly.
Did he declare the boy dead when his heart was still beating?
Was the boy subsequently buried alive because of Gilbert's incompetence?
Posted by: Simon at January 16, 2009 01:49 AM
Guidelines for posting
This is a moderated blog. We will not post comments that include racism, bigotry, threats, or factually inaccurate material.