While the remarks made by the two Bankstown Hospital nurses about killing Israeli patients in an online video posted by Israeli content creator Max Veifer were unacceptable and violated medical ethics, the media frenzy and political condemnation over the incident reveals selective application of moral outrage.
Such statements have no place in healthcare and rightly sparked concerns, however, despite the inflammatory nature of their words, there seems no evidence that the nurses actually intended to carry out harming patients, Israelis or otherwise.
The Australian Islamic Medical Association (AIMA) strongly condemned the remarks, stating:
“AIMA is deeply concerned about a recently filmed video that has circulated online, in which certain NSW healthcare workers appeared to make unprofessional and inappropriate comments. Such behaviour undermines the ethical principles of the medical profession and the trust patients place in healthcare providers.”
AIMA also reaffirmed the fundamental ethical principle that:
“Healthcare should be provided without any discrimination based on race, religion, or political affiliation.”
Following the unfortunate outburst, both nurses have been summarily banned from working in the public health system, seemingly without due process—condemned in a trial by media rather than through a fair and transparent disciplinary procedure.
What’s particularly alarming is the apparent lack of consideration for mitigating factors—an essential principle of procedural fairness mandated by NSW Health Policies and Procedures in disciplinary matters.
There is no evidence that these nurses caused actual harm to patients. Their comments, while deeply distressing, were made in the heat of a highly emotional and provocative argument.
While this does not excuse their words, it does raise questions about whether their comments made in the context of an emotional argument should result in professional exile without due process.
In this case, the nurses were immediately dismissed, permanently banned from practicing as nurses, raided by police, and subjected to national humiliation. As Senator Payman noted:
“They’ve apologised. They have been punished. What is the end goal here? What exactly are we trying to achieve—justice or just public humiliation?”
AIMA also emphasised the need for due process:
“We urge the relevant authorities to conduct a thorough investigation and take appropriate action to uphold the highest standards of professionalism and accountability in healthcare.”
However the rapid escalation of this controversy was not driven solely by the content of the video, but rather by its political utility to silence the critics of Israel who are deeply affected by the genocide of Palestinians.
The “United Muslim Community Statement,” released by Stand For Palestine Australia, signed by multiple Muslim peak bodies and community leaders, aptly highlighted this hypocrisy:
“The most revealing aspect of the reaction to the nurses’ video is not the video itself—but the speed, intensity, and uniformity of response from certain political leaders and media outlets.”
The statement further condemned the media’s role in manufacturing outrage when politically convenient, while remaining silent on other instances of discrimination, particularly those targeting Muslims and Palestinians. As the statement pointed out:
“Outrage is manufactured when it serves a political narrative, with silence strategically deployed when the truth might expose the complicity of those in power.”
This sentiment was echoed by Senator Fatima Payman in her Sunday 16 February video posted on Instagram, referring to the lack of outrage over a deliberate attack on an imam in Sydney, when she asked:
“Where was the national condemnation? Where was the wall-to-wall media coverage? Where were the prime minister and the premiers denouncing it with the same force we see for these nurses’ comments?”
Despite the clear danger of such an incident perpetrated by an anti-Muslim individual near a school, the response was markedly muted in comparison to the nurses’ remarks.
A familiar pattern of using accusations of anti-Semitism to silence criticism of Israel was also evident in this controversy. Stand For Palestine Australia’s statement noted:
“The labelling of this video as ‘anti-Semitic’ follows a well-documented pattern of gaslighting by Zionist lobby groups and their friends within government and media circles.”
This tactic, as highlighted in The Daily Telegraph’s recent attempt to fabricate an anti-Semitic incident at a local café, serves to delegitimise genuine criticism of Israel’s ongoing actions in Gaza.
The newspaper sent an undercover journalist wearing a Star of David cap to a Palestinian restaurant in an effort to provoke a reaction and manufacture a story.
Senator Payman rightfully called out the double standards:
“This is a reputable news outlet, pulling a deceptive stunt on a local small business owner with the sole motive of creating division and smearing the reputation of the Muslim and Palestinian community. But there were no police raids, no national condemnation, no politicians lining up to denounce this.”
The disparity becomes even clearer when compared to how Islamophobic and anti-Palestinian attacks are treated.
Statements from Australian and Aotearoa New Zealand Doctors for Palestine (ANZDFP) reaffirmed the ethical obligations of healthcare workers but questioned why similar violations from those who express anti-Palestinian sentiment do not receive equivalent condemnation.
The selective outrage, the disproportionate response, and the blatant double standards in media coverage and political commentary serve to deepen societal divisions rather than foster genuine cohesion.
Comments