Pro-Israel Group Sues Doctor, Finds Free Speech Isn't Terrorism
Dr. Ghassan Abu Sittah, a British-Palestinian surgeon, recently won a case brought against him by UK Lawyers for Israel (UKLFI) to the General Medical Council (GMC). UKLFI alleged that Abu Sittah's social media posts from Gaza were antisemitic or supported terrorism. The GMC panel, however, found no evidence for these claims, concluding his posts were neither antisemitic nor promoting violence.
(One might wonder if documenting horrific injuries is now considered ‘supporting’ the violence that caused them.) This isn't just about Dr. Abu Sittah. This is a pattern where organizations, often with deep pockets and pro-Israel agendas, attempt to weaponize institutions like medical councils or university administrations to silence critical voices. While UKLFI isn't AIPAC, the playbook is
familiar: smear, deflect, and silence. When facts from the ground don't fit the narrative, attack the credibility of those sharing them. It appears the GMC recognized the difference between documenting atrocities and condoning them, a distinction often lost on those more interested in narrative control than objective truth.