Posted on 01/24/2016 11:56:30 AM PST by Slings and Arrows
YES, yes we can...
They knew there was Taliban in there and they also know who's taking care of them.
Little message about picking sides.
May God smite him.
Well then a doctor carrying his doctors bag is fair game.
muzzies drawing air are fair game for human beings.
Fair game for terrorist? Really?
Wow, what an unfortunate choice of words.
This guy should not be in a position of authority.
Mechanics Without Borders...I love it!
IMO, doesn’t quite look like he’s firing on all cylinders.
Agreed.
Doctors without Borders is an arm of terrorism. I’m sorry it just is. That doesn’t mean every doctor is a terrorist but the leadership is clearly sympathetic to terrorism.
It’s Time to Treat Doctors Without Borders as a Terrorist Organization
FrontPage ^ | October 4, 2015 | Daniel Greenfield
http://www.frontpagemag.com/point/260336/its-time-treat-doctors-without-borders-terrorist-daniel-greenfield
End non-profit status for them and for any organization that funds them
Doctors Without Borders has a long history of collaborating with and defending terrorists. And even being terrorists.
Doctors Without Borders’ personnel are once again lying through their teeth, denying the facts put forward by US and Afghan personnel and covering up the use of medical facilities by the Taliban Jihadists as human shields.
It’s time to deal with Doctors Without Borders, a cynical name for an organization in bed with Islamic terrorists.
The acting governor of Afghanistan’s northern Kunduz province said Sunday that Taliban fighters had been routinely firing “small and heavy†weapons from the grounds of a local hospital before it was apparently hit by a U.S. airstrike over the weekend.
In an interview, Hamdullah Danishi said the Doctors Without Borders compound was “a Taliban base†that was being used to plot and carry out attacks across the provincial capital, Kunduz city.
“The hospital campus was 100 percent used by the Taliban,†Danishi said. “The hospital has a vast garden, and the Taliban were there. We tolerated their firing for some time†before responding.
Doctors Without Borders is lying and denying everything. The media is predictably taking the side of the extremist left-wing group. But the solution is obvious.
1. Treat Doctors Without Borders members just like ISIS recruits when it comes to international travel. At no point in time should they be allowed to travel to conflict zones since it is manifestly clear that they do so to aid terrorists. If they lie about their travel plans, they should go to jail.
2. End non-profit status for them and for any organization that funds them.
3. End any special status that they have when operating in conflict zones since they aren’t medical personnel, just terrorist auxiliaries who were aiding the Taliban takeover of Kunduz.
Doctors Without Borders won the Nobel PEACE prize.
So did Jew killer Arafart.
No no, its “Mechaniques Sans Frontieres”. The french gives it cachet’ and charm!
Or not.
CC
Dershowitz: Doctors Without Borders Really Is ‘Doctors Without Morals’
By Richard Pollock 11/11/2015
International law experts are blasting Doctors Without Borders for forcibly removing civilian patients from the aid group’s Kunduz, Afghanistan, hospital and replacing them with wounded Taliban fighters when the city fell to the rebel control in late September.
Alan Dershowitz, an acclaimed Harvard constitutional lawyer and authority in international law, said that he was not surprised that the group, known as Medecins Sans Frontieres, favored Taliban fighters over civilian patients, telling The Daily Caller News Foundation in an interview that he regards Doctors Without Borders as “Doctors Without Morals.â€
Dershowitz charged the group with having a long history of anti-Western political stances and of not being neutral. He says MSF “is a heavily ideological organization that often favors radical groups over Western democracies and is highly politicized.â€
The lawyer said the doctors also were hypocritical. “What they violate is their own stated mandate and that is of taking no political ideological position and treating all people in need of medical care equally. It’s just not what they do.â€
The MSF’s hospital in Kunduz came to international attention when it suffered mass casualties on Oct. 3 after a U.S. Air Force gunship attacked and destroyed the trauma center, which served 22,000 patients in 2014. The group charged the U.S. attack on the compound constituted a “war crime.†Thirty people died in the attack.
Five different investigations are currently underway, and President Obama has promised compensation to the victim’s families.
Yet MSF itself may have violated a whole host of humanitarian laws by its own admission that Kunduz hospital administrators agreed to discharge Afghan civilian patients at the behest of Taliban officials and replace them with wounded rebel soldiers.
The acknowledgement was buried inside a Nov. 5 “interim†report released by MSF that traced the internal activities at their hospital leading up to the attack.
MSF disclosed in its report that on Sept. 28, the day the city fell to rebels, hospital administrators “met with a Taliban representative to discuss the need to free beds for other critical patients due to the ongoing fighting, and therefore for some patients to be discharged.â€
On Sept. 30, MSF passively reported that “a large number of patients discharged from the hospital, including some against medical advice. It is unclear whether some of these patients discharged themselves due to the discussion to free some beds between MSF and the Taliban representative.â€
At one point during the Taliban occupation, the group conceded in its report that nearly half of the 140 beds at the hospital were occupied by Taliban fighters.
MSF never stated in its report that it protested, resisted or objected to the Taliban request.
The medical group has not publicly denounced the Taliban since Kunduz was freed of Taliban rule in early October. Nor did it say anything about the rebel demands in an hour-long press conference held by the group on Nov. 5 when it released its report. MFS did not respond to a DCNF request to discuss the issue.
MSF has never shirked from attacking those which it regards as wrongdoers. In its USA filing with the Internal Revenue Service for 2014, the group indicated it is more than a medical service organization and frequently speaks out publicly when they see wrongdoing.
“As part of its founding principles, MSF stands ever ready to speak out publicly on a given issue should the situation call for it,†it stated in its IRS Form 990 filing.
The removal of civilian patients for soldiers violates a number of long-held provisions of the Geneva Convention and International Humanitarian Law. Both internationally-sanctioned protocols require that administrators to protect non-combatants who are patients at medical clinics and hospitals in war zones.
In its IRS filing, MFS does say it frequently serves as an advocate for those who are neglected, in this case, Afghan civilian patients. It says it will speak out when “a certain group is being neglected, that military or political efforts are causing severe medical consequences.â€
The group’s silence troubles David Rivkin, a partner at the Washington, D.C. lawyer firm of BakerHostetler who has practiced before the International Criminal Tribunal and the International Court of Justice on international humanitarian law and on the laws of war.
“The fact that they did so without any protest certainly does mean that it leaves a question mark about what they were up to,†he told TheDCNF in an interview.
He told TheDCNF he considered the MFS action at the Kunduz hospital to be “unprecedented,†saying the effect of its actions were to “transform a civilian hospital into a military hospital.â€
Ken Isaacs, a vice president for the Christian relief organization Samaritan’s Purse, said the situation appeared “highly irregular.†The group founded by Franklin Graham currently operates a hospital in war-torn South Sudan and operated a second hospital there for 10 years. It also ran a hospital in Afghanistan from 2002 to 2006.
“I have not heard of a precedent like it. But I would say it’s highly irregular. It’s very unfortunate,†he told TheDCNF in an interview.
Two different sets of international laws govern the war in Afghanistan. One is the Geneva Convention of 1949, which covers international conflicts.
Article 16 of Convention IV states, the wounded and sick “shall be the object of particular protection and respect†and that “only urgent medical reasons will authorize priority in the order of treatment to be administered.â€
An additional protocol states, “In all circumstances, they shall receive, to the fullest extent practicable and with the least possible delay, the medical care and attention required by their condition.â€
Surprisingly, MSF does not consider the war in Afghanistan to be an international war, even though NATO forces are actively engaged on the ground and the Taliban launch attacks from neighboring Pakistan.
The group adopts the Taliban formulation that it is an “internal conflict.†The group also never uses the name Taliban but calls them “opposition forces†to the government in Kabul.
Under the terms of an internal conflict a different body of laws kick in, called International Humanitarian Law.
Yet even under the IHL set of rules, there are strict protections for civilians.
The International Committee of the Red Cross invokes the IHL on the protection of civilians in hospitals stating, “only urgent medical reasons shall authorize priority in the order of treatment to be administered. Criteria based on nationality or rank are excluded.â€
When asked by TheDCNF, the International Committee of the Red Cross declined to comment on possible MSF violations.
One does not have to look beyond Afghanistan’s borders for legal guidance. Article 18 of the country’s public health law states, “Health services shall be provided by the nearest health facility to … those whose health condition requires emergency aid, without any discrimination, and by taking into consideration the prioritized status of patients.â€
Isaacs says, however, that when war descends, international rules often are the first casualty.
“There is the Geneva Convention. There is International Humanitarian Law. And there’s war. And when wars happen, the rules don’t matter really. They should. But they don’t matter. Things happen,†he said.
He believes in the end, MSF was probably pressured into the civilian-fighter swap. “I’m certain that it’s not what MSF wanted to do. If they did it, they were coerced to do it,†he said.
Follow Richard on Twitter
Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
I’m having trouble posting a link here from Frontpage by Daniel Greenfield that’s entitled “It’s time to treat Doctors without Borders as a Terrorist Organization.”
I don’t know why I have such trouble linking here. I never have this trouble on FB.
LOL! You posted the link I had trouble with. Ignore my previous post.
"...or lack there of..."
BINGO!
Doctors Without Borders - Medecin Sans Frontieres is of French origin and tends to be hard core modernist secular.
Does Medecins Sans Frontieres have any religious or political affiliations?
No, Medecins Sans Frontieres does not have any religious or political affiliations. We carry out our work and assist those in need regardless of race, religion, gender or political affiliation. We remain completely independent so that we have greater freedom to go where we are needed and to speak out about the suffering and injustice we see in the course of our work.
Thankyou for sharing.
Isn’t “BRAUMAN” a JEWISH name???
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.