February 23, 2010
Posted by yaman
ei: Harvard center condemns, then defends, fellow’s pro-genocide statements
If calls for the deliberate starvation of a blockaded refugee population, in front of an audience made up substantially of Israeli military and political officials responsible for the siege of Gaza, does not cross any line, the Weatherhead Center has yet to provide any indication of what forms of ex…
m-f-r, how dare you call a population “superfluous.”
3 Comments
February 24, 2010
You should provide a link to the actual quotes. From what I read from your last post, the comments weren’t pro-genocide. From the little that I read, they’re not saying to starve the people to death to decrease their population. They are suggesting that less food should be given to them so they stop having so many kids.
I’m not necessarily saying this is okay, but it’s definitely not genocide. I’m just saying that you twisted the story.
February 24, 2010
If you click on the “source” link on both posts, it takes you to the original Electronic Intifada article with all the relevant information. Martin Kramer’s, strangely in his own defense, says:
Manipulating environmental factors to have an effect on another people’s population is a pretty twisted, sick-minded thing to do, and yes, it falls under the rubric of genocidal logic.
February 24, 2010
“Manipulating environmental factors to have an effect on another people’s population is a pretty twisted, sick-minded thing to do, and yes, it falls under the rubric of genocidal logic.”
No one’s talking about manipulating any environmental factors. Kramer is saying to stop providing these “pro-natal subsidies,” which, he says, encourage the people to have more kids. Foreign aid is not an environmental factor.
I’m sure you’ve already read this quote and I completely agree with it:
“Accusations have been made that Martin Kramer’s statements are genocidal. These accusations are baseless. Kramer’s statements… express dismay with the policy of agencies that provide aid to Palestinian refugees, and that tie aid entitlements to the size of refugee families. Kramer argues that this policy encourages population growth among refugee communities. While these views may be controversial, there is no way they can be regarded as genocidal.”
His views may be controversial, but definitely not genocidal.
Leave a comment