When Kelly Houle and I sold a copy of Why Evolution is True that had been autographed by many in the science/atheist/skeptic community (including several Nobel Laureates), and which had been illuminated with Kelly’s artistic flair, we decided to donate the proceeds to Doctors Without Borders (DWB, founded as Médecins Sans Frontières), an NGO that goes around the world with its doctors and nurses helping people in distress, particularly during tragic events like hurricanes and civil wars. It even won a Nobel Peace Prize.
All this sounded great to us, and we donated the $10,500 the book brought on eBay to DWB. (Have a look at the book here.) We thought it would do a lot of good, which was the sole object of our auction.
Later, however, I heard a rumor that DWB was somewhat anti-Israel and didn’t use Israeli doctors, although it does use doctors and nurses from many other countries. I emailed the organization asking about this, and never got a reply. I found accusations of DWB being antisemitic and anti-Israel (and pushing pro-Palestinian propaganda) on the internet (see here, here, here, and here, for example), and was distressed, as such an organization should not be taking political stands or engaging in political advocacy, which it was reported as doing. If they really don’t use Israeli doctors, and those doctors are willing to be used, then it’s guilty of antisemitism, for help is help, regardless of where it comes from or the religion of the medic.
You can find other and similar accusations on the web, but here’s a new one, written by Alain Destexhe, who used to be a big shot in the organization. He’s identified this way:
Alain Destexhe, Medical Doctor (MD), a Gatestone Institute distinguished senior fellow, is an Honorary Senator in Belgium, former secretary general of Médecins sans Frontières (Doctors without Borders) and former president of the International Crisis Group. Author of Rwanda and Genocide in the Twentieth Century.
I think that gives his words sufficient credibility! And the Gatestone Institute has published an article by Destexhe article that accuses DWB of complicity with Hamas. Click the headline to read, and judge for yourself:
The piece is based on a new investigation of the organization, a group is loosely organized so that members can say what they want on social media. Check out the link to the report as well as the accusations given in the excerpt below:
The public statements since October 7 of Doctors Without Borders (Médecins Sans Frontières, MSF) and its employees, on the ground in Gaza, show a systematic bias in favor of Hamas and hostility to Israel. MSF has failed in its humanitarian purpose and violated its own charter, which proclaims “assistance… irrespective of race, religion, creed or political convictions.”
MSF has been present in the Gaza Strip since 1989. It now plays a leading role there, with at least 300 staff members, and works closely with local hospitals on a number of projects, either directly or indirectly with the Hamas “Ministry of Health”.
MSF is often quoted by the international media and is seen by public opinion as an objective, neutral and independent observer of the conflict in the region. Because of the history of the organization, which in 1999 was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, the French and international media have blind faith in MSF when it comes to reporting what it states.
However, a new investigative report on the social media posts of MSF and its employees has seriously called this reputation into question. The tweets and the Facebook posts of MSF and around 100 of its employees in Gaza were scrutinized.
Despite being subject to the MSF Charter, a significant proportion of its staff seem to share the Hamas point of view and support the terrorist attacks of October 7. For example, from October 7:
- “Always remember that Gaza has done what all Arab armies have not done… !! It dug tunnels with its own hands. It built its weapons with its own hands…!! She sacrificed her sons, her women, her youth, her elderly, her homes and her mosques for the dignity of this land…!!” — MSF nurse (see Appendix 1).
- “oh my God, we love you” — MSF doctor (see Appendix 1).\
. . . MSF’s biased analysis of events can also be found among MSF’s official spokespeople, who — usually quick to communicate — are completely silent on the atrocities of October 7.
. . .MSF repeated the false claim that Israel bombed Al Ahli Hospital in Gaza. In a tweet dated October 17, MSF France wrote in French:
“We are horrified by the Israeli bombing of the Ahli Arab hospital in Gaza, which treated patients and housed displaced people. Hundreds of people were killed according to local authorities. This is an unacceptable massacre.”
MSF did not specify that these “local authorities” are part of Hamas.
Here’s the DWB Twitter (“X”) site logo, followed by a couple of tweets:
This is their pinned tweet, and there are repeated calls for a ceasefire. Their concern for healthcare “on both sides of the conflict” rings hollow in the face of their complete lack of concern for what happened in Israel.
We need an immediate ceasefire now.
End the indiscriminate bloodshed and the massive attacks on Gaza.
Restore the flow of humanitarian aid.
We call for the protection of civilians and health care facilities on both sides of the conflict, at all times. pic.twitter.com/eSkgamtcVn
— Doctors w/o Borders (@MSF_USA) October 27, 2023
A DWB Facebook post decrying the US’s veto of a ceasefire in the Security Council, which accuses the US of giving “diplomatic cover for the ongoing atrocities in Gaza”. Surely not an institutionally neutral pronouncement, and misguided as well. One could just as easily say that “the U.S. is trying to allow Israel to defend itself so that the tiny country can continue to exist.”
DWB picketing for a ceasefire at the UN:
Much of the article above was taken from the 47-page report, which gives examples of DWB and MSF’s tweets and other comments on social media supporting also this from the investigation report, written by Destexhe; it’s 47 pages long and gives lots of examples. Some quotes are blow, bolding is theirs:
MSF has had a large presence in Gaza for a long time. Moreover, in a series of tweets, MSF provides precise information on the situation at the Al Shifa hospital, showing its perfect knowledge of the premises and the staff. Is it possible and credible that MSF and its employees knew nothing and saw nothing of Hamas’s violations of humanitarian law?3
To date, MSF has not once denounced the violation of these “sanctuaries” by the Hamas belligerents, even though on 7 October it asked: Health facilities must not be targets. MSF calls on all parties to respect health facilities, which must remain sanctuaries for people in need of care.\
. . .MSF has had a large presence in Gaza for a long time. Moreover, in a series of tweets, MSF provides precise information on the situation at the Al Shifa hospital, showing its perfect knowledge of the premises and the staff. Is it possible and credible that MSF and its employees knew nothing and saw nothing of Hamas’s violations of humanitarian law?3
To date, MSF has not once denounced the violation of these “sanctuaries” by the Hamas belligerents, even though on 7 October it asked: Health facilities must not be targets. MSF calls on all parties to respect health facilities, which must remain sanctuaries for people in need of care.\
And the report’s conclusion:
Since 7 October, MSF, which is very active on X, has not tweeted a single word denouncing the crimes against humanity and war crimes committed by Hamas on 7 October, the hostage-taking of dozens of civilians and the use of hospitals as barracks or human shields. MSF has denounced Israel on numerous occasions, but never these violations of humanitarian law committed by Hamas.
Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) regularly refers to international humanitarian law, but its interpretation of this law varies widely. MSF has seriously failed in its humanitarian purpose.MSF’s Charter asserts the organisation’s neutrality, impartiality and independence from any political, economic or religious power. MSF must be irreproachable and neutral in its work. This is clearly not the case in Gaza.
The proximity of some MSF staff to Hamas raises questions about possible links between MSF and extremist groups.
Now one could argue that the humanitarian crisis in Gaza is worse than Israel, and DWB is simply reflecting different levels of crisis. But in the face of their long history of pro-Palestinian and anti-Israeli propaganda, and apparent failure to use Israeli doctors (I still haven’t found out whether they do, but suspect not), I think DWB is guilty of injecting political and anti-Israel bias into their actions. Plus there’s their complete silence on the activities of October 7, and of course don’t mention that Hamas and IJ are still firing rockets at civilians in Israel. Apparently Israeli lives simply aren’t worth mentioning. No call to stop firing rockets?
One thing is for sure: I deeply regret having given this organization $10,500 a while back, and they’re not going to get dime one from me any more. I put them in my will as getting a substantial amount of money, but I struck them out. There are organizations that aren’t reported to be allied with terrorism that deserve my money more. Read not just the report above, but the linked article, and perhaps google “Doctors Without Borders” Israel to see more. Then judge for yourself.
Just to add this link (from “NGO Monitor”, which I don’t know much about):
“Doctors Without Borders (MSF): Systematically Ignoring Israeli Victims and Hamas Terror”
That’s really disappointing to read. I’ve been donating a small amount each month to them for the past quarter of a century. I’ll be cancelling and telling them why before the next payment is due.
I did wait to see if MSF denounced what was happening in Israel and there was silence. They used to be so neutral. Just report on what medical need there was and stay silent in the conflict itself as they should and this is what drew me to them.
Off topic, Diana…. FYI, in case you don’t know about it already. I just learned from my DIL about this fairly new and effective migraine med called Suvexx (Sumatriptan/Naproxen Sodium combo). Prescription required.
Wishing you the best of the season!
Hi there – thanks for the heads up. I’m actually taking Ajovy now – a monthly auto-injector CGRP inhibiter. So far so good.
YRWLCM… I mentioned it because my DIL recently had a continuous headache for many days, and had to get emergency CT scan and MRI, and they found nothing amiss. So it was diagnosed as migraines. This med they prescribed stops it quickly, and helps tremendously even though it doesn’t prevent it recurring. She’s at the computer all day at work.
Good to know about Ajovy, thanks!
Yes here is something to be aware of – I used to take that combo sometimes (naproxen and a triptan)….both are NSAIDS. If you are someone who suffers from migraines you should take no more than 10 NSAIDS a month and that includes Advil, Cambia or any NSAID at all. This is because people with Migraine disease can get rebound migraines if you take too many. Also triptans are vaso-constrictive so everytime I take one, I risk that and normally that wouldn’t concern me but I have essential thrombocythemia (a rare blood cancer that causes the over production of platelets) so I don’t want to risk any kind of stroke. Occasional use is okay but if she starts suffering where she takes the maximum then she should see if there is something else that can help. I also take a preventative beta blocker. This however got me down to taking 8 triptans/month and not taking any other NSAIDS for other pain which to me was a bit high so after several years, I tried this. It’s very expensive and requires private insurance to pre-approve it.
I used to make an annual charitable gift to DWB until it adopted the systemic racism trope (and, like other non-profits, without supporting evidence) in its appeals for donations. Like the SPLC and ACLU, it has embraced woke ideology and all three have become parodies of their former selves. I now send the donation reserved for DWB to the International Rescue Committee, and FIRE now get my donation instead of the ACLU.
The IRC is calling for a ceasefire so you may want to reconsider.
“The only way for civilians to be protected and for humanitarian assistance to be provided at the necessary scale required is for the conflict to end,” says Bob Kitchen, the IRC’s vice president of emergencies. “The need for a ceasefire becomes more urgent as each hour passes, with more than two million Palestinians facing humanitarian catastrophe.”
https://www.rescue.org/article/crisis-palestine-what-you-need-know
“Bob Kitchen, the IRC’s vice president of emergencies.”
I wonder what his salary is and what he DOES on a daily basis. Forgive me – a thousand apologies – but I have to wonder, is there an “Assistant Associate Vice President for Minor Kerfuffles” in the IRC?
Childish, I know, but whenever I hear about the International Rescue Committee I can’t help thinking about Thunderbirds.
Thunderbirds: One of my favorite shows from my youth!
To see Thunderbirds is on my To Do list. I am not the least embarrassed to say that I am a nut for “Fireball XL5.” (I love Barrie Gray’s music set to the episode, “Hypnotic Sphere.”)
The theme song was great, too! It almost seemed too tantalizingly adult for a kids’ TV show. I still listen to it on YouTube now and then. It’s my wife’s birthday. I think I’ll go listen to it now with her.
They’re a real organization – the “International Rescue”, not the “Thunderbirds”. They specialise in post-earthquake S&R, having a considerable number of volunteers from the cave rescue community – who are a little more practiced in searching through unstable piles of large boulders than most people. They’ve reached out into the Search and Rescue D*g groups too, the last few decades, since most CROs (Cave Rescue Organisations) have got involved in a lot of mountain/ outdoors search and rescue stuff of necessity. (A car is still parked at 10 pm ; some caving “clanky bits” visible ; no note ; it’s raining heavily ; which cave are they down? Cue a phone call to the local SARDA (Search and Rescue Dogs Association) call-out cascade.
Generally they’re amused by the Thunderbirds association.
Is there any information about the Gatestone Institute, which published the report about Doctors Without Borders? The Wikipedia piece about the Institute may be unreliable itself, but it lists examples of supposed misinformation put out by the Institute.
I would be more concerned to check on the links the author cites than the institute itself. It’s probably conservative, but it’s too easy to dismiss a piece simply because it’s put out by a conservative institution. Remember, plenty of other places have accused the organization of ignoring or dissing Israel.
Eventually every charity will be found to be anti-Semitic.
Is this some kind of sarcastic comment? Please explain.
A bit sarcastic but I will not give to any charity at this point that claims to do Gaza relief.
Perhaps not will be revealed but so many have been either the organization itself or its workers. Even the Red Cross has been shown to be anti-Semitic.
Who does one give to?
Realistic.
With the qualification that it’ll be pro-Israeli PR companies finding them to be anti-Semitic, and sometimes on the same day as an pro-Nazi Pr company is accusing them of being anti-Nazi.
In the words of Bush the Second (IIRC), “If you’re not with us, you’re against us.” There can be no middle ground in the war against extremism.
I, too, have noticed several suspicious calls by DWB for cease fires that seemed to be far from objective. Thank you for posting this collection of examples. It they really don’t use Israeli doctors (either by policy don’t solicit help from Israelis or actively reject Israeli doctors who want to participate) then they do seem to be antisemitic. I’d like to know what their policies and practices really are regarding Israeli participation.
Hi, I was intrigued by the informations and I asked MSF in an email, if they Israeli doctors and/or nurses are working with them. Here is what i Got back:
“Doctors Without Borders helps people in need, those affected by natural or man-made disasters and armed conflicts, without discrimination and regardless of their ethnic origin, religious or political beliefs.”
“Of course, the ban on discrimination includes not only our patients, but also our employees. Israeli citizens are not excluded from working with Doctors Without Borders. We are a global movement with around 68,000 employees from more than 160 countries.”
This is their policy but this does not mean that Israeli doctors or nurses are actually working with MDF.
I will try to get more information.
Yes, do. I didn’t get an answer. I want to know if they actually USE Israeli doctors or nurses.
here is the answer I got today:
“Yes, we have Israeli employees.
Our last internal personnel report is from 2022 and Israel is also named as one of the more than 160 countries from which our emergency services come. However, I cannot tell from this whether these were medical staff.
If your question is about the current war: There are currently no Israeli colleagues deployed in the Palestinian territories for security reasons.”
do you think this is enough of a disclosure?
If you’re an organisation with a policy of not discriminating on this, that, or the other basis, then recording data about employees affiliations would provide the necessary tools to set up discrimination.
Probably they have to record passport numbers – for visa and transport administrivia – but that can be stored properly (salted then encrypted – in the cryptographic sense) so that only people with a need to know would actually be able to access that level of personal information. It always made me extremely nervous when I was having to handle such personal information for my colleagues in doing our administrivia.
We only started providing “work” email addresses for colleagues after one of our Croatian employees was identified as such from her “.hr” email address by a Serbian employee CC’d on an “all field staff” email, who then leaked her ID to some much nastier people. That event won an argument that I’d been having for about 4 years, all over a hundred quid a year fee to move to the “50 to 500 address” tier to our email provider. (Our Ops Secretary also had a stern lesson in why you should use “BCC:” not “CC:” on bulk emailing ; I don’t think she made the error again in the 5 more years she was with us.)
Until you’ve met it, it’s hard to realise just how dangerous sloppy handling of private personal information can be. I didn’t until I met such cases in my volunteer work at the Trade Union, well before flagging the issue at my employer.
You have done a masterful job of outlining bias, impotency, egregious misconduct, lack of transparency, and complicity in conflict by DWB. Over the decades, I have been acutely aware of extreme bias in the UN (what the Rebbe called “the House of Lies”) and am only now becoming aware of the pernicious and malignant bias of NGOs. I, too, pledge to not donate a single dime.
Thank you for your stellar coverage of Israel…truly unparalleled.
+1
“Thank you for your stellar coverage of Israel…truly unparalleled.”
No doubt. My friends and family seem very ignorant about Hamas, Palestine, Israel and this war; with the help of WEIT, I’ve been able to spread much needed clarity, and it seems to be accepted without pushback. Jerry’s intrepid focus on this war is invaluable.
Yes, thank you.
Thank you for this.
There are so many organizations worthy of support, and so many questionable/corrupt NGOs continuing to receive millions in donations, including from USAID. The aid pouring into Gaza must get to those needing it, not to Hamas. The millions going to UNWRA from the USA; how much of this aid is diverted to Hamas, to build a complex subterranean terror network over 20+ years?. And, to propagandize hate in Palestinian schools?
The USA’s relationship with aid/donations to the UN and our individual donations to organizations that don’t deserve the privilege/consideration must be questioned/investigated. I hope congress take this up.
There is no way of stopping aid going to Gaza from reaching Hamas. How is it possible to send building supplies into Gaza without Hamas or Hamas sympathizers diverting it?
I too once contributed to MSF, but stopped years ago when its bias became evident. Its humanitarian volunteers in Gaza, who require relationships with the ruling Hamas officialdom, simply warp the parent organization into Hamas apologetics. A similar evolution has long been evident as well in the American Friends Service Committee.
“Now one could argue that the humanitarian crisis in Gaza is worse than Israel, and DWB is simply reflecting different levels of crisis.”
I think that more than that, one could say that it makes sense for DWB to comment on the situation in Gaza, because they have feet on the ground there and their actions are desperately needed there. Furthermore, getting any reliable reporting from Gaza is almost impossible and they have first hand accounts on what is going on. So there is a reason for them to comment and get involved.
On the other hand, there is no denying that the attack against Israel on October 7th was despicable, but I don’t believe that DWB should or needed to be commenting on it as I don’t believe that Israel needed help from DWB and there was plenty of credible and independent reporting of the attack.
It seems to me that comments/reports DWB on the attack on Israel would make little sense because they I believe they had no first hand accounts on the ground.
But MSF doesn’t normally take sides in condemning one side or the other when they are in-country on a medical-assistance mission. Indeed, they can’t, because their ability to operate depends on both sides being willing to trust that MSF doctors and nurses and truck drivers will treat their wounded soldiers equally with their enemies when they bring them in, and not shoot them for working for the other side. As one orientation rep put it, “If they bring in a wounded warlord for you to operate on him and he dies, for the sake of all of us his people have to believe that you did your best.”
In their appeals to donors MSF always said, “Send money for surgical supplies and portable toilets and diesel fuel,” not, “Call on your elected representatives to press for Side X to concede and stop the fighting that is wounding so many.” If a hospital did come under attack (whether by one side or just by free-lance bandits), then yes, MSF would protest but it would also usually precipitate MSF’s withdrawal from the mission (as they did in Rwanda.) Becoming embedded with one side (who provides some military protection and logistical support) is possible in Gaza only because there are (or were) no Israelis who need treatment, too. But it is inevitably compromising.
The only possible justification I can think of for MSF not to hire Israeli or Jewish doctors (if that’s true) would be that in many places MSF goes, both fighting sides as well as the general population are culturally antisemitic. Their presence could make security of the mission difficult to manage even if there is no fighting, just a natural disaster. The host government might even stipulate, “No Jews.” Israelis who go abroad on official missions to provide humanitarian assistance usually need IDF people along (out of uniform) to protect them from the local Islamic terrorists.
Well, the author did cite his own paper and sort of spoke about it as if he found it elsewhere lol.
Dr. Destexhe said:
“However, a new investigative report on the social media posts of MSF and its employees has seriously called this reputation into question. The tweets and the Facebook posts of MSF and around 100 of its employees in Gaza were scrutinized.”
Author of that paper?
“Alain Destexhe”
For all that though and a couple other links given here, yes it seems he is right.
After so long embedded in that society, first under the PLO and then under Hamas, it must be almost inevitable for an NGO to be compromised in its objectivity, especially in societies with no transparency or non-partisan institutions, where submitting to the whims and requirements of Hamas commanders and ideologues must be a daily occurrence. I suspect it’s been made clear to DWB that if they started to strenuously object to, or publicly expose, Hamas’s use of hospitals as command centres, they would rather quickly find themselves expelled as undesirables, or worse. In that situation, it’s easy to see how the moral reasoning goes: “If we go, these people will get no treatment, and even more of them will die, so let’s play along so we can continue our work.” Thus Hamas forces DWB (and no doubt other NGOs working in Gaza) to become complicit in their own corruption.
Lincoln Memorial defaced with Pro-Hamas graffiti.
https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/4369746-lincoln-memorial-steps-vandalized-with-free-gaza-graffiti/
I read an article written by MSF on Facebook or some other on-line source some years ago. They explained that their experience in Palestine led them to realize that the violence perpetrated by Israel was so much greater than the violence instigated by the Palestinians, that they could no longer have a neutral viewpoint. They illustrated their position with examples of Israeli violence, such as against inmocent children. I decided they would not receive my charitable donations. So this headline wasn’t surprising. Though at the time I read the article, I certainly didn’t think “next step terrorist complicity.” That makes me both sad and angry.
I stopped my regular monthly payments a couple a weeks ago. Received a request for more donations to support work in Palestine, blaming everything on IDF. Not one mention of the attrocities that precipitated it. Now donate to wildlife conservation, they need our help as well.
I read the report including the French translation of the Arabic in the appendices. If even half of that is true, it is profoundly disappointing. I stopped donating to MSF several years ago because I thought they were thwarting European immigration law in rescuing migrants in the Mediterranean Sea, and that this was beyond their scope of providing humanitarian medical assistance in crisis zones, as well as taking sides in a political controversy.
My Amazon Smile donation has been going to MSF for many years.
I think it’s time to stop that.
The Amazon Smile program ended earlier this year:
https://www.aboutamazon.com/news/company-news/amazon-closing-amazonsmile-to-focus-its-philanthropic-giving-to-programs-with-greater-impact
I support the good work that MSF does, and I strongly support the idea that institutions like MSF (and universities) should not censor the opinions or social media of their staff, and should not fire staffers for their lack of objectivity or awful beliefs. We should not blame universities for the views of their professors and students, and we should not blame corporations for the views of their workers. Otherwise we will see free speech imperiled.
As for MSF’s official statements, it seems reasonable for them not to denounce a terrorist group that might target MSF’s own doctors. MSF is needed in Gaza, and MSF cannot function there if it reveals everything it knows about Hamas. If you believe Hamas is a murderous regime, I think you should sympathize with the people who must live under its terror rather than denouncing their silence. It also was reasonable for MSF to denounce an attack on a hospital, even if they followed the erroneous media reports about Israel being at fault. And considering the doctors who have been killed in Gaza, it seems reasonable for MSF to call for a ceasefire, even if you disagree politically with this approach. Even if we’re going to denounce all the evil in ther world, maybe we shouldn’t obsess about the minor rhetorical flaws of one organization that is unquestionably saving people rather than killing them.
I agree with you that MSF should not censor the personal speech of members.
And I agree that there are situations where MSF needs to stay silent. But, given that, they need to stay silent on all political/contentious issues, otherwise the combination amounts to taking sides.
If my poor murky memory serves me, a week or so ago PBS News Hour interviewed a DWB (female) doctor, who to the effect denied or at least cast doubt on the idea that Hamas had control of a certain hospital (and the tunnels underneath it) in Gaza. Her comments raised my skeptical hackles.
I’m so sorry to learn about this, Jerry. It must be a bitter pill for you and Kelly Houle to swallow. That illuminated book and its collection of signatures were a labour of love and a thing of beauty. I can only hope that perhaps innocent lives were actually helped by the money you donated back then and the good intentions that were behind the gift. Intentions do matter. We know better now.
Thanks to PCC(E) on this. I saw the same interview on PBS last week.
I’ve changed my whole giving profile in the last few months. Political and charitable.
This has changed everything for me.
No more of my money to terrorists or terrorist-adjacent. I’m disinterested in debate – it is a hard border for me. I spent 50 years, with no children to leave it to, making money in finance and law and I’ve done well: and I’m not giving a dime to terrorists, or those who even obliquely look the other way in the face of the destruction of Israel.
D.A.
NYC
I have written off Doctors Without Borders years ago, after they refused to help Kayla Mueller.
I’m sorry. The Gatestone Institute is EXTREMELY biased on this topic.
The person writing it is employed by them apparently.
Take that I to consideration while reading this.
Truth is the first casualty of war.
I would try to see if there is a distinction between MSF administrators and the medical staff. The latter have an ethical code to treat all who are in need.
I have worked overseas and some career administrators are grade A jackasses (like those who think the indigenous population is subhuman), and the medical staff struggles to protect patients.