Where’s the full monty on Mads Gilbert?
Re: “Emergency in Gaza” | News | February 8
Humera Jabir’s interview with Gaza doctor Mads Gilbert cleverly omits key information McGill students deserve to know. While I would support a discussion of medical ethics and the need for appropriate medical care in dangerous situations, Gilbert’s background and political involvement should not be overlooked. Gilbert had voiced support for the 9/11 terrorist attacks, saying in an interview with Norwegian paper Dagbladet, “The attack on New York did not come as a surprise with the politics the West has followed the last decades. I am upset by the terrorist attack, but I am at least as upset over the suffering that the U.S. has caused. It is in this context that 5,000 dead has to be seen. If the U.S. government has a legitimate right to bomb and kill civilians in Iraq, the oppressed has a moral right to attack the U.S. with the weapons they may create as well.” When asked if he supported a terror attack on the U.S., Gilbert said, “Terror is a bad weapon but the answer is yes, within the context which I have mentioned.” Students have a right to full disclosure of the figures The Daily chooses to interview so they can make an informed decision. If students wish to learn more about international events, why doesn’t The Daily use credible sources?
Vicky Tobianah
U3 Honours Political Science and English Literature
McGill Daily News Writer
Tags: This article has no tags
paul ephross wrote:
We have come to a sad state when unadorned anti-Semitism and racism masquerade as progressive politics. Hitlerism is alive and well, though dressed in turbans and gowns. Those who foster it will reap their deserts. In the meantime, the rest of us will do well to keep our powder dry. Paul Ephross
Feb 12, 2010 at 04:56 PM
Seymour Mishkin wrote:
Nicely done.
Feb 12, 2010 at 04:58 PM
s wrote:
dear paul, i'm not sure if you know, but mads gilbert doesn't wear a turban or a gown, nor do many of the millions of non-arabs that criticise the state of israel.
as well, last time i checked, criticising the state of israel, and it's dispicable dismissal of all humane considerations, is not synonymous with racism, insofar as it cannot be equated with only one race, nor anti-semitism, insofar as it is not synonymous with being a semite.
would you like to be the one to tell us how many international laws israel has broken over the past 60 years, or should i?
Feb 12, 2010 at 11:04 PM
s wrote:
as well, vicky, as long as you're keeping everyone updated on the facts, perhaps you should be the one to let everyone know that mads gibert retracted a portion of his 9/11 statement, and said that civilian deaths are civilian deaths and should never occur. good thing you're checking such credible sources!
Feb 12, 2010 at 11:07 PM
N wrote:
s,
Paul did not equate criticizing the state of Israel with anti-semitism. He claimed that criticizing Israel has become an outlet for anti-semites to express their hatred in a politically acceptable fashion. While this may or may not apply to you, you cannot deny that it does apply to others. Anti-semitism has been widespread for thousands of years so the likelihood of it disappearing all of a sudden is quite slim.
Feb 13, 2010 at 03:13 AM
s wrote:
and what was the relevance of paul's comment to the article at hand?
Feb 13, 2010 at 06:20 PM
Es wrote:
Yeah, he apologized after his fellow Norwegians were outraged at him.
Feb 13, 2010 at 07:57 PM
Es wrote:
Paul's comment is irrelevant, with its lack of context.
Feb 13, 2010 at 07:58 PM
We've switched commenting systems. Please scroll to the bottom of the article, where you can now log in and respond to this story.