Via Media

Via Media


From the home of the 2008 Summer Olympics..

posted by awelborn

Jay Nordlinger reports on a report:

There is a horrifying story going around the world: In the northeast of China, thousands of prisoners are being held, so that they can be killed for their organs. The prisoners are practitioners of Falun Gong, the meditation-and-exercise system. The facility at which they are being held — called a "concentration camp" or a "death camp" — is at Sujiatun. Chinese human-rights activists believe that this name should cause the same shudders as Treblinka and the others.

I cannot say whether this story is true; I can say that one ought to pay attention.

Of course, "organ-harvesting" is a very familiar story: The PRC has been doing it, with prisoners, for many years. In 2001, the U.S. Congress held hearings on the matter, which caused a sensation. But the sensation died down, as sensations tend to do. Organ-harvesting has gone on, with no negative consequences for the Chinese government.

Organ-selling is a huge business for the Chinese. You can obtain organs in China as you can nowhere else: any type, and very speedily.

The subject of organ-harvesting has been revived by the discovery of Sujiatun. I will not attempt to do justice to this story in this space (as though justice could be done). I will mainly direct you to the website of the Epoch Times, and specifically to its archive on Sujiatun: here. The Epoch Times is an international newspaper whose reason for being is to tell the truth about China. Media in China itself, of course, are government-owned or -controlled.

I also wish to direct you to an article by the tireless Bill Gertz of the Washington Times: here.



Advertisement
Comments read comments(51)
post a comment
Robb

posted March 30, 2006 at 11:09 am


So what does it take for our nation to see that despite economic and material gain, business with china is just not good? Do we just blindly continue down the spiral and blow it off as not our problem?



report abuse
 

Liam

posted March 30, 2006 at 11:24 am


Folks
Keep this in mind for ESC research: the supposed moral right of third parties to the tissue/organs of another….



report abuse
 

Maureen O'Brien

posted March 30, 2006 at 11:47 am


May God have mercy on us all.
If you read the article, they are even killing children for their corneas! And some of the organs are removed while the victims are unanesthetized and still alive!
Freshness is important, you see….



report abuse
 

Jacob

posted March 30, 2006 at 12:10 pm


Back in the early 90s when we decoupled MFN with China from human rights…
It all starts there.



report abuse
 

Ken

posted March 30, 2006 at 12:30 pm


Organ-selling is a huge business for the Chinese. You can obtain organs in China as you can nowhere else: any type, and very speedily.
As in “Killed and Harvested to Order”.
Incidentally, the People’s Republic only does this with “Politicals”. Common criminals are too likely to be defective.



report abuse
 

Dag Selander

posted March 30, 2006 at 1:34 pm


Dear my Friends, You know why most of the Global World, including, EU, state leaders and nations, all are silent? You know the Answer, yes. But it is scandal and a disaster that the Market Greed could get all so silent…
In the North, in Sweden, we are worried about how people are suffering for the CCP terror and dictatorship in Beijing. Do have a look into the website SHRIC.org
Rich Blesings
//Dag Sr



report abuse
 

mrp

posted March 30, 2006 at 1:43 pm


Ken –
I’d add:
Arrested
Killed
Harvested To Order
I wonder if PRC organ transplant “industry” has an online order form?



report abuse
 

Gerard E.

posted March 30, 2006 at 2:15 pm


Previous reports claim rich Japanese people receive the organs when in need of heart or liver transplants. Beyond abominable.



report abuse
 

Old Zhou

posted March 30, 2006 at 2:28 pm


Not that bad things don’t happen in China, or elsewhere, but the Epoch Times, which is widely available in the San Francisco area, is the newpaper of Falun Gong. Although this is obvious to readers and students of media, it may be less obvious to non-readers who only come across citations of Epoch Times articles. For example:

The Epoch Times and New Tang Dynasty Television (NTDTV), are actually FLG organizations. The Chinese government claims they are propaganda tools for the FLG intended to damage the reputation of the Chinese government. The FLG claim they are independent news organizations.
There does appear to be, at the very least, an intimate association between these groups and the FLG. In early 2004, Li Hongzhi, the founder and spiritual leader of the group, gave his one and only interview since the group was banned to the NTDTV. According to a report in the Far Eastern Economic Review, prominent FLG spokespeople serve as a director for NTDTV and on the board of The Epoch Times; both organizations give the FLG prominent coverage. In addition, both organizations are staffed by volunteers, often FLG followers, whose main jobs are unrelated to journalism.
One reason why the group might deny its association with these news organizations is that Li Hongzhi teaches his followers that they must not be political. This was a good survival tactic while the group was still legal in China. However, it now seems at odds with reality while the group functions as a protest movement outside China. Nonetheless, the group continues to maintain this position. This may partly explain why they deny association with these media organizations notable for their distinctive focus critical of the Chinese government.
Regardless of how one views the control/ownership controversy, it is clear that the FLG organization and its members are producing news and information for public consumption. In the past few years, Mr. Li has encouraged his practitioners to establish their own news organizations in order to get their message out. This might have something to do with the group’s gradually increasing dissatisfaction with FLG coverage in mainstream press. Initially, the coverage of the group was mostly sympathetic, frequent and reflected the group’s views. Over time, however, followers felt the coverage grew inadequate and failed to reflect their concerns about the magnitude and immediacy of their cause. The solution was to create their own coverage.
What are the goals of the FLG and how might those goals influence the information they present? The one with which we are most familiar is to expose the suppression and alleged mistreatment of Falun Gong practitioners in China and force the Chinese government to rescind its ban. A second goal, in the words of Li Hongzhi, is to “clarify the truth” in order to “save sentient beings.” The movement holds that a near-future moment of “rectification” of the universe by the Fa (meaning the great cosmic law) will renew and recreate the cosmos, paving the way for Falun Gong to receive its rightful place as the truth and supreme teaching. With this rectification, those who believe in Falun Gong will be saved and those who do not will perish. This fact requires all practitioners to save others by converting them to Falun Gong or at least convincing them to believe that Falun Gong is good. This task is, as Mr. Li described it, “the responsibility and mission history has bestowed upon you in fa-rectification&you are now their only hope of entering the future.” Following the beliefs of FLG is no less a task than saving the world’s people while also saving yourself.

I don’t believe anything from Epoch Times that I cannot verify elsewhere.



report abuse
 

Blind Squirrel

posted March 30, 2006 at 3:12 pm


Certainly the “Epoch Times” is at the least strongly pro-Falun Gong, and implacably anti-CCP, but neither of those things–especially the latter–would cause me automatically to dismiss what they have to say here. Without question they have access to sources of information that no Western journalist does. I too will look for independent confirmation of this story before I buy it fully, but in view of the extraordinary brutality with which the PRC is known to treat Falun Gong practitioners, I can’t exclude the possibility.



report abuse
 

mrp

posted March 30, 2006 at 3:25 pm


As this article from Transplant News reveals, mainland Chinese organ agencies are actively selling human organs to foreigners, with problematic results.
Excerpt:
China has an increasingly lucrative transplant industry but it is tainted by allegations that the organs of executed prisoners are harvested and sold to hospitals.
China’s health ministry on Tuesday also declined to comment, saying the official in charge would not be available until next week.
Japanese media reported earlier Tuesday that hospitals in China had received a gag order, telling them not to say anything to foreign journalists.
China Daily reports that :
China’s Ministry of Health on Monday issued a temporary regulation on human organ transplants, explicitly banning the sale of organs and introducing a set of medical standards for organ transplants in an effort to guarantee medical safety and the health of patients.
Mao Qun’an, the ministry’s spokesman, said that the temporary regulations ban any kind of organ dealing, require the medical institutions to obtain a written agreement from the donors before the transplant and donors are entitled to refuse the donation at the last minute.
The regulation takes effect July 1.



report abuse
 

little gidding

posted March 30, 2006 at 3:43 pm


During the last Democratic Convention, listening to Reagan’s boy talk about how great it will be to carry one’s own private biological kit into the hospital, I envisioned us all having Mini-Me’s made to order, and I felt like my head was exploding. Yet other people don’t seem to have been creeped out by that. Then I read Kazuo Ishiguro’s novel, “Never Let Me Go,” and a big black hole opened up in front of me.



report abuse
 

makina

posted March 30, 2006 at 4:00 pm


The National Review interviewed one of the witnesses, please take a look.
A Place Called Sujiatun
http://www.nationalreview.com/nordlinger/nordlinger200603300722.asp



report abuse
 

makina

posted March 30, 2006 at 4:02 pm


National Review: A Place Called Sujiatun



report abuse
 

Old Zhou

posted March 30, 2006 at 4:14 pm


How many Americans know about NATCO, or the scope of the transplant industry?
Are you aware of “presumed consent” laws for organ donation?

Under a presumed consent system, it is assumed that a decedent wishes to donate organs and tissues, unless there is evidence to the contrary. Presumed consent systems are being used in varying degrees, in 16 countries. Twenty-one states and the District of Columbia currently have some form of presumed consent law that applies to the removal of corneas for transplantation.

South Africa and Brazil also have large organ markets.
HaAretz reported in December 2003 that over half of all Israeli’s receiveing kidney transplants bought kidneys illegally.
The British Medical Association is pushing hard for general “presumed consent” to deal with organ shortages in the UK.

Each year many people die waiting for an organ transplant. At the same time, bodies are buried or cremated complete with organs that could have been used to save lives, not because the deceased objected to donation but simply because they never got around to signing up to the Organ Donor Register or informing their relatives of their wishes.
The BMA has long called for concerted action to improve all aspects of the transplantation infrastructure [1 - go to reference here] and overwhelmingly supports a system of ‘soft’ presumed consent for organ donation where relatives’ views are also taken into account.
Dramatic advances have been made in transplantation over the last 20 years yet thousands of people are still dying from conditions that could be overcome by the transplant of a donor organ. The BMA is concerned about the increasing gap between the supply of organs for donation and the numbers of people requiring a transplant. The current system is unable to meet the increasing demands placed upon it and steps must be taken as a matter of urgency to increase the availability of organs for transplantation.
The BMA welcomes the Government’s initiatives to improve the situation and in particular the initiatives in the Human Tissue Act 2004. Under this Act, transplantation in England, Wales and Northern Ireland is covered by a single piece of legislation. In addition, the Act clarifies the legal position on the use of non-heart beating donors and facilitates the increasing use of live donors. The BMA also welcomes proposals for similar legislative change in Scotland. The BMA is, however, disappointed that neither the Act (in England, Wales and Northern Ireland) nor the Bill (in Scotland) contains provision for presumed consent.

Personally, I have grown wary of the whole organ transplant industry, with its impacts on the health care economy in general, with creepy stories of “harvesting” organs from people in comas after family agree to “pull the plug,” with the global black market in organs. Did anyone see “Dirty Pretty Things”?
At this point, I don’t think it is so much an issue of whether or not an individual wants to make a graceful choice to donate their tissues or organs, after their death, to a sick person.
It has become a global industry, with A LOT of money involved, and too many “clients” with too many anxieties and too much fear of death willing to do anything to get spare parts. And, of course, the doctors and hospitals and pharmaceutical companies make some money, too.
It has gone from a gesture of compassion by a donor to a global debasement of human beings as nothing more than walking spare part factories just waiting to be harvested as inventory for a growing industry.



report abuse
 

Old Zhou

posted March 30, 2006 at 4:18 pm


Dear makina,
The witnesses seem connected to Falun Gong.
Sorry, no credibility with me.
Which is not to say that I don’t believe such things could happen in some back corner of China, or South Africa, or Brazil, or Romania.
I just don’t believe the hiding wife of a deranged doctor and a hiding journalist, both who happen to be talking to Falun Gong reporters at Epoc Times, who are convinced that nothing good happens in China.



report abuse
 

Old Zhou

posted March 30, 2006 at 4:29 pm


Larry Kramer, playwright, novelist, promoting “Presumed Consent” in the USA:

We Must Have Presumed Consent
More and more people with HIV coinfected with hepatitis B or hepatitis C are going to need organ transplants, particularly liver transplants. This is not an opinion. This is a fact.
As more and more of us all over the world discover we are carrying one or more of these viruses, even if we are being treated for them — or particularly if we are being treated for them — the more likely it becomes that one of our organs is going to cease working effectively. And the longer we are being treated, i.e., the longer we live, the more that chance grows.
With all the new drugs for HIV and viral hepatitis, it is now safe, ok, kosher to transplant “coinfecteds,” which is what people with viruses are called in the transplant world. The New England Journal of Medicine has even written approvingly of such transplants. Insurance companies can no longer simply refuse to pay for these hugely expensive procedures on the grounds that they are “experimental.” These operations are no longer experimental–too many of them have been done successfully.
Right now there are hundreds of thousands of people in this country waiting for organs. Most of them will die before they get them. Many of them will die after they have been put on a waiting list.
Why is this?
Because not enough people in America donate their organs to be used after they die.
It is as simple and as complicated at that. There are more than five people waiting for every organ made available by donation.
In many foreign countries this extreme shortage does not exist. That is because these countries (and they include Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Italy, Norway, Singapore, and Spain) have what is called a Presumed Consent organ collection system.
That means that every person in that country is deemed to be an organ donor unless s/he specifically opts out. That means that when an accident occurs to a person who has not opted out, and brain death is declared, his or her organs can be taken immediately without the time-wasting rigmarole America requires for “approval.” An organ only has a few hours to get from one body to the new one. In America you sign the back of your driver’s license if you are willing to be a donor, and even then most centers still require permission from a family member, which, believe it or not, may not be given.
I have been trying, since my transplant, to find a way of changing America’s organ donor system to one of Presumed Consent. Well, you would have thought that Presumed Consent was akin to the biggest blasphemy known to civilization. Opponents from the right, the conservatives, the orthodox, you name it, including, believe it or not, the ACLU (did you know that the organs of dead people have rights?) have screamed in opposition. These opponents do not care that Spain, a very Catholic country, has the most successful organ procurement system in the world….

Research paper: The Political Economy of Presumed Consent, by Kieran Healey, U. Arizona, April 2005.
From the American Kidney Fund on how to get more kidneys in the market:

…The American Kidney Fund supports the performance of well-designed research studies on the effects of offering financial compensation, which may take a variety of forms, for cadaveric organ donation….
The American Kidney Fund advocates states adopt and widely publicize presumed consent laws, which include appropriate statewide public education programs and materials….

Proposed US law to trade time for organs with prisoners:

A proposed Miracle Man Amendment (to National Transplant Act of 1984 and Uniform Anatomical Gift Act) would create the The Donation Inmate Organ Network (DION). DION would have two routes for donation.
An inmate could donate an organ for transplant, or for research, upon death. A contract would be drawn up between the inmate, the organ bank, the United Network of Organ Sharing (UNOS), and the Federal Bureau of Prisons. An inmate could pledge up to 3 organs upon death, for 60 days each of time suspended from his/her sentence – a maximum of 180 days. An inmate could pledge his/her entire body, for one year of suspended time.
The inmate could also choose to be a “local living banker (LLB), ” a living donor of one kidney, part of the pancreas, a lung, or the liver. A LLB would receive 7 years of reduced time.
An inmate could be an LLB and also pledge to donate organs or his/her body upon death; he would gain both credits, [described in full in Bartz D, The Donation Inmate Organ Network, Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal March 2003.]
DION can end all organ shortages, if used to its ful

The whole organ transplant thing is out of control.



report abuse
 

Ken

posted March 30, 2006 at 4:45 pm


Anybody remember the 70s SF stories about “organlegging”? And the SF novels where it was background color?
In Larry Niven’s “Known Space” series (best known for the novel Ringworld), future governments used the death penalty like Chin Dynasty Legalist Emperors purely to keep up with the demand for transplant-organ immortality.
In other series and stories, black-market “organlegging” (harvested under-the-table and sold to the highest/most desperate bidder) often took center stage, to the point it became a running joke in near-future dystopian SF.



report abuse
 

makina

posted March 30, 2006 at 4:47 pm


Old Zhou,
Actually the National Review interviewed Jin Zhong – the first witness that is, not just the Epoch Times. A full-scale investigation is what is needed at this point and it sounds like the UN envoy is looking into it.
U.N. envoy looks at Falun Gong torture allegations
http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=worldNews&storyID=2006-03-30T155024Z_01_L30516921_RTRUKOC_0_UK-CHINA-UN-TORTURE.xml&archived=False



report abuse
 

Old Zhou

posted March 30, 2006 at 5:11 pm


Some other news on “organ economics” from around the world. It is not a China problem. It is a global problem. (But Falun Gong wants to make China look like the worst country on the planet.)
From Pakistan:

Pakistani labourers sell kidneys to escape bondage
Today Idrees, 27, is a free man, after almost 10 years in bondage at a brick kiln near Sheikhupura, some 100 km north of the eastern Pakistani border city of Lahore. He won his freedom by selling his left kidney. With the Rs90,000 (US$1,500) he got, he was able to pay off a debt of around Rs60,000 ($1,000) he and his elderly parents owed to the kiln owner.
The debt had accumulated over 15 years, but after paying off the amount, he had little left over. Less than six months after undergoing surgery at a private clinic to remove his kidney, he is once more in debt, having borrowed Rs5,000 ($840) from a cousin a few days ago. “It’s a pity I can’t sell my other kidney,” he said only half jokingly, adding: “But at least we are free.
Allah (God) will help us now.” Idrees’s own ill-health since the surgery prevents him finding work, while his father earns less than $100 a month as a ‘day wager’ at construction sites. Idrees is not alone in his plight.
In March, Pakistani newspapers printed chilling photographs of at least a dozen brick kiln workers posing shirtless outside the Lahore Press Club. Each displayed a large, diagonal scar above the left hip. They had sold their kidneys to pay off debts to kiln owners, and earn freedom for themselves or close family members.
The workers were protesting against the lack of official attention to their plight, and that of thousands others like them. Common practice Hundreds of bonded workers across the country are believed to have sold kidneys to pay off debts. Though debt bondage is banned under the 1992 Bonded Labour Abolition Act, it flourishes at kilns scattered across the central Punjab province and on agricultural estates in the southern province of Sindh. “The continued existence of bonded labour shows that the authorities simply have no wish to see it end or to enforce the law,” Asma Jahangir, a leading lawyer, rights activist and chairperson of the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP), told IRIN.

Nice Econimics article

Forward-looking approaches
Forward approaches involve offering some type of incentive for people to become part of an organ donor registry so that if they die under circumstances where they can donate, their organs will be recovered. An incentive to donate, for example, could be created by something as simple as offering a discount on driver’s licenses to those who sign up to be an organ donor. Georgia, the only state with such a program, offers a discount of $9. The Georgia program has not been legally tested against NOTA, however, and the governor has said that he would like to rescind the program in order to increase state revenues (Basinger 2003).
An options market in organs would allow firms to buy the rights to organs in the event of the donor’s death (Cohen 1995, Barnett, Blair, Kaserman 1996). Every potential donor would either be paid a small amount today to join the registry or they would register today in return for the possibility of much larger payments to their estates should they become actual donors. An options market, therefore, would work much like life insurance (which used to be called “death insurance” a more accurate if less appealing name). The advantage of an options market, over an arbitrarily-chosen license fee discount or similar plan, is that firms would have an incentive to promote donation and the prices offered would automatically increase as shortages become more severe. Payments for the organs would ultimately be made by insurance companies and government just as for other medical services (see further below on the costs of financial compensation plans).
An advantage that all forward-looking approaches share is that the autonomy of the donor is maximized and the decision-making burden is taken off the family at that most difficult time, when they have just learned that their loved one is brain-dead. And, fortunately, experience shows that when families are informed of their loved one’s wishes, they almost always assent to the donation (Siminoff et al. 2001).
On-the-Spot approaches
“On-the-Spot” incentives are offered only to the families of people who are suitable deceased donor candidates. The American Society of Transplant Surgeons, for example, has said that it would be ethically acceptable to offer to make a charitable contribution on behalf of the deceased or to cover the funereal expenses of deceased organ donors (Arnold et al. 2002). In my judgment, a direct payment to the estate of the deceased would also be ethically acceptable. Payments of this kind can be given as a way of saying thanks for the sacrifice the family has made in service to the community and would be similar to the death benefit offered to the families of servicemen who die in the line of duty.
For example, the Ad Hoc Committee to End the Intractable Shortage of Human Organs, of which I am a member, has recommended a gift for the gift of life that would go the estate of deceased organ donors. We have suggested that the following type of language that should be used in approaching the family of a potential donor.
Dear Mr. Smith/Ms. Jones, as you may know, it is our standard policy to offer a gift of $5,000 to the estate of the deceased, as a way of saying “Thank you for giving the gift of life.” The money can be used to help offset funeral or hospital expenses, to donate to your loved one’s favorite charity, or simply to remain with the estate, to be used in any manner the heirs see fit. No price can be placed upon the many lives that can be saved by your gift. Our donation in return is merely society’s way of honoring the sacrifice you are being asked to make, and is a token of our deep and sincere appreciation for your generosity at this most difficult time.
Saving money while saving lives
In this age of expensive medical care, many people wonder whether financial compensation for organ donation would be too expensive. In fact, we can save money while saving lives. Kidney transplants are cheaper than dialysis over prospective lifetimes and they pay for themselves within 2-3 years (Schweitzer et al. 1998, Loubeau et al. 2001, Matas and Schnitzler 2004). Most of the costs of dialysis are paid for by the Federal government through the End Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) program. Thus, any increase in organ supply automatically reduces costs to the Federal government. How much would it cost to increase donation rates from say 6000 to 9000 a year? $2500, $5000, $10,000 per donor? At $10,000 the costs of financial compensation would be $90 million but each additional kidney saves the Federal government approximately $100,000 so savings would be at least $210 million per year.6 Thus on a pure financial basis paying donors pays for itself. More importantly, increases in organ donation would allow more dialysis patients to live longer, better lives. Adding in the value of these additional quality-years would significantly increase the value of donation.
Reciprocity Plans
The economics of common resources provides another perspective on the shortage of organs. Resources owned in common tend to be under-supplied and over-utilized. No one wants to pay to restock a lake, for example, when the benefits of restocking flow to everyone regardless of whether or not they helped to pay for the restocking. As a result, open fisheries are almost always driven to depletion. The solution is to close the fishery to those who do not help to restock the lake.
UNOS considers organs to be a “national resource,” owned in common. The result, as in other areas, is a tragedy of the commons. Everyone wants to fish in the organ pool but no one has a direct incentive to “restock the lake” by signing their organ donor card. As with fishing lakes, a solution to this problem is to close the organ pool to non-donors.
Consider a no-give, no-take policy for organs (Tabarrok 2002, Gubernatis and Kliemt 2000). Under this system in order to receive an organ you must have previously signed your organ donor card.7 Under no-give, no-take, signing your organ donor card can be thought of as joining a club, the club of people who have agreed to share their organs. Or one can think of signing the organ donor card as the price that you pay for organ insurance.
An advantage of the no-give, no take policy is that it satisfies most people’s moral intuitions. Many people find the idea of paying for organs distasteful but nevertheless are comfortable with the morality of reciprocity, those who are willing to give should be the first to receive.
A variant of no-give, no-take can be implemented quite easily within the current system by giving those who have previously signed their organ donor cards extra points that would advance them on the queue. In fact, a similar program is already in place. People who have previously been live organ-donors are given extra-points should their one remaining kidney fail them. No-give, no-take simply extends this idea from actual donors to potential donors.
Something like no-give, no-take is currently being implemented privately. Lifesharers.com is an “organ club.” Anyone can join.8 Members agree that if their organs should become available they will go first to a fellow Lifesharers member. (If everyone joins Lifesharers, it becomes equivalent to no-give, no-take.)
Although reciprocity proposals like no-give, no-take have moral advantages it is important to remember that their primary purpose is to increase the incentive to donate and therefore to increase the total number of organs available.

Germans buying Indian organs.
More on India:

n India, “unrelated paid organ donation has become prevalent … because long term dialysis is not possible, there is virtually nonexistent cadaver programme, and there is also no serious cultural / religious conflict to paid organ donation” (sic) [46]. As a result, kidneys and corneas have, for many years, been sold at prices that range from ?200-2,000 to wealthy recipients from throughout the world in a system of organ tourism that is worth millions of dollars annually.

More on China AND Taiwan:

There is, however, international concern over a hidden aspect to Chinese transplantation where, according to some reports, large numbers of organs extracted from executed prisoners are transplanted into wealthy patients who have literally ordered a well-matched organ suitable for use in them [53]. In the highly sophisticated industry that has developed, the convicts and their families are not asked to consent to donation nor do they receive any compensation, with the main financial beneficiaries being the foreign doctors who refer clients to these transplant centres as well as the state and military organisations that run these centres. Depending on the organs required by recipients, prisoners could either be shot through the head or the heart, with executions sometimes taking place adjacent to a hospital where a patient had already undergone pre-operative preparation to receive a transplant, with the purpose of such proximity being that it was almost as good as a live donation in reducing ischaemia time [54]. Transplanting cadaver organs obtained from executed prisoners is not restricted to mainland China though, with similar activities being performed in Taiwan, although in this country, there was no trade, as all such organs were placed in the national pool for allocation to all suitable recipients. In the period October 1990-December 1991, out of 51 executed Taiwanese prisoners, 22 “voluntarily” donated organs at death, with donors being shot through the head rather than through the heart, as was the standard operating procedure when executing convicts, in order to retrieve organs [55].

How about going after the organ buyers?



report abuse
 

Caroline

posted March 30, 2006 at 5:27 pm


I wouldn’t be surprised if in the next revision of the CCC we were told that we had a duty to donate our organs. It would not be a matter of charity but of social justice or “biological justice”, a term yet to be invented. It is very unjust that some people have organs which work a lot longer than those of other people. The duty of the biologically privileged is in justice to leave whatever still works to the biologically marginalized and where possible to share a kidney or whatever while they ae still alive.



report abuse
 

Little Gidding

posted March 30, 2006 at 5:57 pm


And Republicans and other counter-revolutionaries, Kulaks, and defectives have many tasty and otherwise useful body parts that really should be used for the greater good!



report abuse
 

ambrose

posted March 30, 2006 at 7:28 pm


File this under “For what it’s worth”
The PRC-critical South China Morning Post, as far as I can search (1993), has run exactly three articles that mention the word Sujiatun (one is about a toxic spill on the Songhua River, one is a listing of schools, and one about services to the mentally ill). The paper has written recently treatment of Falun Gong adherents in high-security “ankang” (peace and health) hospitals. There has even been a lot of discussion in the paper this week about harvesting organs (for wealthy foreigners) from executed prisoners and whether executions are planned around organ need. But nothing about Sujiatun.



report abuse
 

Ying

posted March 30, 2006 at 7:33 pm


Please have a look at the websites below. It is a webpage advertising for organ transplantation at the cheapest prices in the world. Calling itself
“China International Transplantation Network Assistance Center”.
Do you know why it says its better than all the other transplantation centres in the world … because they say they transplant from live donors. It says that the organs are donated by volunteers and it also says that the organ is not part of the price it is free. Does anyone believe that? These transplation centre is in the same city as Falun Gong claim the concentration camp for organ harvesting is.
China International Transplantation Network Assistance Center
> http://www.zoukiishoku.com
> http://en.zoukiishoku.com/list/facts.htm
In the Question and Answer section they basically say that their organs
come from living donors. Implying that they have the competitive
advantage in the field of organ transplantation because in other
countries the organs are not from living donors.
Q.Is it possible to be infected with other diseases such as HIV or
hepatitis after the kidney transplantation?
A:It is not necessary to worry about that. The biggest problem with a
*kidney transplantation * is the tissue match. Before the *living kidney
transplantation *, we will examine the donors renal function and
leukocyte in order to assure the safety of the *kidney *. So it is more
safe and reliable here than in other countries, where the organ is not
from a living donor.
Related Link: http://www.zoukiishoku.com



report abuse
 

makina

posted March 30, 2006 at 7:39 pm


According to AU:
“Today, China stands alone in continuing the use of organs of executed prisoners for transplant surgery.”1 International organizations such as the World Medical Association and the World Health Organization regard the sale of human organs as inhumane and unethical. These organizations believe it is essential to address all concerns surrounding illicit organ trade and possibly invoke an international trade mandate to which all nations must adhere. Human rights organizations and numerous former Chinese citizens, like Harry Wu, assert that China uses human organs from executed prisoners to sell for substantial profit. The repercussions resulting from the lack of international laws regulating global human organ trade has caused a worldwide upheaval. Human rights issues encircling the illicit human organ trade as well as the effects of this trade in China and globally should be examined and analyzed.
http://www.american.edu/TED/prisonorgans.htm



report abuse
 

Old Zhou

posted March 30, 2006 at 7:50 pm


Ying,
In general, all kidneys come from live donors.
Even in the US.
See, for example, this page on Live Donor Kidney Transplants from Johns Hopkins.
Living Donors also commonly provide liver and bone marrow. There are experiments with live donor lung transplants.
The mere fact that a donor is alive is nothing to be surprised about.
But selling one’s kidney is, unfortunately, a common transaction in many parts of the world.



report abuse
 

Lynn

posted March 30, 2006 at 7:50 pm


This is what I came up with from my end…sorry I don’t know how to do the hyperlinks on this blog.
A couple of them were mentioned earlier on this blog…
U.N. envoy looks at Falun Gong torture allegations
http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=worldNews&storyID=2006-03-30T155024Z_01_L30516921_RTRUKOC_0_UK-CHINA-UN-TORTURE.xml&archived=False
A place called Sujiatun
http://www.nationalreview.com/nordlinger/nordlinger200603300722.asp
Toronto Sun: For sale: $25,000 for a liver
http://www.torontosun.com/News/Columnists/Worthington_Peter/2006/03/25/1505613.html
Washington Times: China harvesting inmates’ organs, journalist says
http://washingtontimes.com/national/20060323-114842-5680r.htm
News Max: Report: China Selling Prisoners’ Body Parts
http://view.e.newsmax.com/?ffcb10-fe8f10737263027d70-fe2415797d6d027f731670-ff2c1d70746d
Directorio participates in Falung Gong press conference before the UN http://www.directorio.org/press_releases/press_releases.php?note_id=966



report abuse
 

Old Zhou

posted March 30, 2006 at 8:03 pm


Ying,
Do you not find it interesting that the Website that you link to is Japanese?
From a description of their center:

Our patients come from all over the country,and in addition, we have succeeded in doing kidney transplants for 3 Japanese patients, 7 patients from Korea and Kidney-Pancreas Transplants for American patients.

The price list is in US dollars.
Who are the buyers of these Chinese organs?
Wealthy Japanese, Korean and American, as well as Chinese.
How do you stop that?



report abuse
 

Ying

posted March 30, 2006 at 8:30 pm


It seems that their customers are closeby but some travel many miles, from Canada and the US, etc.
How I would stop it…I would stop it at the root of the problem, which brings us back to the illegal organ harvesting of prinsoners and Falun Gong done by the Chinese Communist Party. Apparently China executes 10,000 prisoners per year…lots of body parts there! In the case of the Falun Gong, the procedure is done without their consent–the policy is to cremate the bodies afterwards to hide the evidence. What could be more horrible than that? I have my doubts that they bother asking permission from the other prisoners before executing them either.
This circus has been going on for at least 20 years in China. So China has built a lucrative (black) market for themselves. The freshest organs around and you only have to wait one week to get a kidney–the clients are not hard to find as you see it is widely advertised on many websites.
It’s time to put the pressure on to stop these gross crimes against humanity. You don’t have to be a supporter of Falun Gong. Just look at the horrendous facts–China has openly admitted to illegally harvesting organs in Dec. 2005. It’s up to us to stop this insanity. You can write to the UN, to your government representative, to NGOs, Doctors without borders, the Red Cross. It’s worth it. What is going on in China is highly inhumane.



report abuse
 

Little Gidding

posted March 30, 2006 at 8:37 pm


Unfortunately, if you take, from the Left, one part Utopian Socialism in which humans are “liberated” from notions of individual responsibility, and, from the Right, one part unhindered free trade in which humans are implicated as both consumers and consumed, and you mix the two together, as it is being done now here and almost everywhere around the globe in different ways, you get concoctions that are extremely volatile, unstable, powerful, and explosive.



report abuse
 

Little Gidding

posted March 30, 2006 at 8:45 pm


I think Zhou-tsu’s point is not to discount the idea of applying pressure on China so much as it is to look inward, from where we are here and notice that the letters demanding them to stop will be postmarked from the same zip codes as their customer orders, requesting more “product.” What to do about that? The same conundrum with indignation over S. American and Asian poppy and coca production. The biggest indignation comes from the same countries that are the most reliable customers. What to do about that?



report abuse
 

Bender

posted March 31, 2006 at 2:00 am


To say that they are “killing” anyone for their organs is highly misleading (although commonly believed).
The present-day practice of organ transplantation cannot wait for death. That is, organs are not taken from cadavers, they are not taken from those we would traditionally consider dead. They long ago realized that most organs were rendered useless if the “donor” were actually dead by traditional criteria. This inconvenience required them to change the definition of death to allow them to remove organs earlier. Now, modern transplant techniques require removal of the organs when the body is still alive — certainly while the heart is still beating. To be sure, they will artificially stop the heart (makes it easier to remove), but if they wait until the heart stops beating naturally, the heart is generally useless for transplant because the heart tissue dies too quickly.



report abuse
 

Bender

posted March 31, 2006 at 2:01 am


In China, I would not be surprised if all they did was sedate the prisoners before gutting them.



report abuse
 

ying

posted March 31, 2006 at 1:15 pm


Apparently in China, they hardly use any anaesthesia on the prisoners before removing their organs — how could they? They have to order a specific quota for the hospital which does not include the thousands of people detained in the underground chambers waiting to die at the hands of the butchers. It’s a living hell for the Falun Gong and the doctors agreeing to do this procedure (none other than torture in this case) are told that the Falun Gong are criminals and it’s OK to do that — it just helps the CCP clean up society. They swiftly turn them to ashes in the crematorium. Most of these doctors have mental disorders after working this job within a year.
And this is just the tip of the iceberg as another witness spoke up to say that there are 36 more death camps in China.
He is a veteran military doctor in the logistics service in the army in Shenyang military zone and cannot reveal his name for understandable reasons.
He must be fearless–he reveals many new details on labour camps and particularly Sujiatun. This is an excerpt:
“One must understand that based on the latest decisions by the Chinese Communist Party’s top level: The Chinese Communist Party’s Central Committee agreed to treat Falun Gong practitioners as “class enemies” and to handle them in any economically beneficial manner without having to report to higher authorities. In other words, Falun Gong practitioners, like many actual felons in China, are no longer regarded as human beings, but as raw materials for commercial products. They have become commodities.”
read more…
http://english.epochtimes.com/news/6-3-31/39910.html



report abuse
 

dave.shemenski

posted March 31, 2006 at 11:19 pm


The mind boggles

Heres a story out of China that beggars comprehension. I hope to God this isnt true. I have no words to describe the horror I feel right now.
Update: The commenters at Open Book seem to have soom good followups to this story. Gag orders i…



report abuse
 

ying

posted April 6, 2006 at 2:45 pm


This is the latest (06 April 2006) on the death camp conspiracy — please help to stop this genocide — call your government representative. My friends have their siblings tortured in China because they won’t give up their belief in Falun Gong and now this atrocity…
Urgent Announcement
Abstract: Falun Gong practitioners in underground concentration camps, including Sujiatun Camp, have been secretly relocated and are subject to slaughter at any time. Meanwhile some hospitals in China have suddenly increased the number of transplant operations.
Since 2001, concentration camps similar to the one in Sujiatun have been set up in multiple provinces to detain large numbers of Falun Gong practitioners. In those camps, the authorities perform organ harvesting from live practitioners for sale and then cremate the remains to destroy the evidence. The atrocities were exposed to the international community in the beginning of March. Within three weeks, the underground concentration camp in Sujiatun was quickly relocated. Meanwhile, some hospitals and transplant centers in China are rushing to perform a large number of transplant operations: A slaughter to destroy witnesses/victims of the concentration camps is happening, and we urgently call upon the international community to initiate rescue programs to stop this new genocide.
To Whom This May Concern:
According to tips from Mainland China and investigations, the Chinese Communist regime hastily published the “Interim Regulation for Human Organ Transplant Practice” after the Sujiatun Concentration Camp was exposed. However, the regulation will not take effect until July 1, 2006, and thus we suspect the regime was allowing time to destroy all evidence of the crimes. All investigation has confirmed that hospitals and transplant centers in Heilongjiang, Hunan, Shanghai, Zhejiang, Yunnan, Anhui, Shan’xi and Xinjiang are operating overtime to perform transplant operations. Hospital staff members told undercover investigators that patients should come in quickly if he or she wants transplants as they can find matching organs in as short as one or two days and it will be difficult after this batch of organs are used up.
According to investigations by non-governmental organizations, the regime has set up concentration camps similar to the one in Sujiatun all over the country. The camps are suspected to specialize in detaining and secretly killing people who are steadfast in their belief in Falun Gong. The camps harvest organs from live Falun Gong practitioners for transplant. The sudden recent increase of organ supply in China is not an individual situation, but is widespread throughout the country. The Chinese Communist regime is suspected to destroy the bodily remains after organ harvesting to wipe out the evidence. We thus believe that the slaughter of Falun Gong practitioners detained in the camps is taking place at an unusually high rate!
After World War II, the international community deeply regretted that it failed to stop the holocaust and made a solemn “Never Again” promise. Sixty years later, history now gives the civilized world an opportunity to correct its past mistake. We hope that this generation can proudly say: We not only made a promise, but we kept our promise. We urgently request the U.S. government, the United Nations and governments of other countries as well as pertinent international organizations to take immediate action and activate all possible mechanisms to stop this new genocide in Mainland China. Every minute of delay will result in irremediable loss of innocent lives and will be a disgrace to the human race!
The Integrated Committee to Investigate the Secret Sujiatun Concentration Camp and the Facts of the Persecution of Falun Gong in China
April 5, 2006
Note: The Integrated Committee to Investigate the Secret Sujiatun Concentration Camp and the Facts of the Persecution of Falun Gong in China is a civil group originated by the Falun Dafa Association and Clearwisdom website after the underground concentration camp in Sujiatun was exposed. The organization was formally established on April 4, 2006. Its mission is to form an “Integrated Committee” with all related international organizations, state agencies and media in requesting to go to China to conduct an independent, direct, interference-free investigation to collect evidence, and completely search for the truth of the persecution of Falun Gong, including the Sujiatun Concentration Camp and other secret concentration camps located elsewhere to end this 7-year brutal persecution.
Spokeswoman of the committee: Sherry Zhang, contact phone: 1-415-845-5295
Posting date: 4/6/2006
Original article date: 4/6/2006
Category: News & Media Reports
Chinese version available at http://minghui.ca/mh/articles/2006/4/6/124643.html



report abuse
 

bobby fletcher

posted April 8, 2006 at 7:06 pm


Hi, here are more news on the authenticity of the concentration camp allegation:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,18669046-7583,00.html
‘’It appears the claims by Falun Gong have been at least substantially exaggerated. Initial investigations by researchers for a US congressional committee have identified the site at Sujiatun as a hospital, where it is suspected organ harvesting occurs but on nowhere near the scale claimed’’
Now, if there is no concentration camp, rather isolated cases of abuse and irregularity contrary to Chinese law, then there exists a very different reality than what’s alleged.
While I agree China’s human rights abuse should be examined, as with all human rights abusers in
the world including my own country USA – lifting data from websites and writing allegory of “Schindler’s List” is not the way.
If we in the West can not be precise with our facts, only resort to nefarious indictment, who will take what we say seriousely?



report abuse
 

Old Zhou

posted April 18, 2006 at 2:06 pm


Regarding the American freedom to buy Chinese organs…
From the Front Page of the San Francisco Chronicle, on Easter Monday: Patients seeking transplants turn to China; Rights activists fear organs are taken from executed prisoners. The article begins:

Dying of liver cancer, with less than a year to live, Eric De Leon flew to Shanghai and paid $110,000 for a transplant.
The San Mateo father of six learned in May 2005 that he had liver cancer. Chemotherapy seemed to knock out the tumors, but in January a scan turned up nine more and he was taken off the transplant list. Too risky, his doctors said. The cancer would probably return in the new organ, the doctors told De Leon, 50, a construction superintendent who cried when he learned of his prognosis.
He wanted to be around for his youngest children, who are 3 and 5 years old, and help put them through college. But the cancer would also probably return after the treatments his doctors were recommending — so he decided to go outside the U.S. health care system.
De Leon researched overseas transplant centers on the Web, chose Yeson International Healthcare in bustling Shanghai and began a blog. The liver he received last month came from a 20-year-old, doctors told him.
Hundreds of Americans and other foreigners are now finding their last, best chance for survival with organ transplants in China, where businesses are opening to meet international demand. Roughly 17,000 Americans needed liver transplants in 2004; only 6,100 patients received them, based on availability, their risk of dying in surgery, their chances for long-term survival and other factors. It is unknown how many Americans are now going to China, India, the Philippines and other developing countries for transplants they cannot get in this country.

There is also a “Question Box Poll” with the article. The question is: “Should Americans be banned from going to China for organ transplants?” Of the 672 responses so far, 75% voted, “No, it might be their only chance to live.” Only 25% voted, “Yes, organs could come from executed prisoners.”
Mr. De Leon has a blog.



report abuse
 

ying

posted June 1, 2006 at 5:13 pm


How can people be so selfish as to literally demand that somebody sacrifice their own liver to save their own lives. Because those organ recipients are well aware of the criminal factors involved.
How could you happily enjoy life and your grand children after being accessory to a murder.
This is blatant immoral for human beings to think that another’s life is worth less than their own;therefore it’s OK to kill them to recycle their ‘fresh’ organs.
This goes completely against the law of humanity.



report abuse
 

Heaven and Earth

posted July 8, 2006 at 7:59 pm


The report showing evidence that the Falun Gong have been butchered for their organs is out-they take the corneas, the two kidneys, then the liver, etc… A full copy of the report can be viewed at: http://investigation.redirectme.net/
For more media coverage go to:
http://ahdu88.blogspot.com/2006/07/kilgour-matas-report-on-falun-gong.html http://ahdu88.blogspot.com/2006/07/2008-beijing-olympics-why-bother.html
Media Advisory, July 7, 2006
David Kilgour and David Matas respond to the Chinese government
statement
The Government of China released a statement in response to our report titled *Report into Allegations of Organ Harvesting of Falun Gong Practitioners in China* dated July 6, 2006. The statement can be found at http://www.chinaembassycanada.org . We have these reactions to this statement:
1. The statement of the Government of China was released the same day as our Report. The statement of the Government of China dismisses our Report out of hand. We view this reaction is unconsidered. It means that the Government of China has engaged in no investigations to determine whether or not what the report contains is true.
2. The statement of the Government of China begins with the phrase
“In order to extricate itself from an awkward position after its lie about “Sujiatun Concentration Camp” has been laid bare, Falun Gong has shifted…”
This phrase is incorrect in a number of different ways. First, it suggests that our Report is a Falun Gong report. Yet, it is not. We are not Falun Gong practitioners. We did this report as volunteers and were not paid for this report by Falun Gong or anyone. Our report represents our own judgment. We have not acted on the instructions of Falun Gong or anyone else in coming to the conclusions we did.
3. The assertions about Sujiatun Concentration Camp to which the Chinese statement refers originated from the ex-wife of a surgeon at Sujiatun Hospital. This person is not a Falun Gong practitioner. This person has not changed or shifted her story at any time. David Kilgour interviewed her. An excerpt of the interview can be found at Appendix 13 of our report.
4. It is our own opinion, expressed in our report, that this woman was not lying. We concluded that she was credible.
5. In our report we did not rely on this witness alone to come to our conclusions. In our report, this is what we said about the testimony of this witness:
“The testimony of the wife of the surgeon allegedly complicit in Falun Gong organ harvesting seemed credible to us, partly because of its extreme detail. However, that detail also posed a problem for us, because it provided a good deal of information which it was impossible to
corroborate independently. We were reluctant to base our findings on sole source information. So, in the end, we relied on the testimony of this witness only where it was corroborative and consistent with other evidence, rather than as sole source information.”
Our report is not a shift from what this witness says, but rather an expansion, with a larger focus than just Sujiatun Hospital.
6. The Chinese statement then says:
“It is obvious that their purpose is to smear China’s image.” We reply that we have no wish to smear China’s image. Our sole concerns are respect for the truth and human rights.
7. The Chinese statement then says: “China has consistently abided by the relevant guiding principles of the World Health Organization endorsed in 1991, prohibiting the sale of human organs and stipulating that donors’ written consent must be obtained beforehand and donors are entitled to refuse the donation at last minute.”
This statement that China made is denied by the facts. The China International Transplantation Network Assistance Centre Website until April of this year set out a price list for transplants. The price list was removed from the website in April, but is still archived. To see the web site now, go to http://en.zoukiishoku.com . To see the archived site, go to
http://archive.edoors.com/render.php?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fen.zoukiishoku.com%2Flist%2Fcost.htm+&x=16&y=11
As well, many individuals can attest to paying for organ transplants in China.
8. The statement that China has consistently abided by the principle stipulating that donors’ written consent must be obtained beforehand is also belied by the facts. Human Rights Watch has reported that consent is obtained from executed prisoners in only a minority of cases. The
organization writes that even in this minority of cases “the abusive circumstances of detention and incarceration in China, from the time a person is first accused of a capital offense until
the moment of his or her execution, are such as to render absurd any notion of “free and voluntary consent.”
*Organ Procurement and Judicial Execution in China*, August 1994
9. The China statement goes on to say:
“China has issued a regulation on human organ transplants, explicitly banning the sale of organs and introducing a set of medical standards for organ transplants in an effort to guarantee medical safety and the health of patients. The regulation requires medical institution which is qualified for practising human organ transplant to register at provincial level health department. Unregistered medical institutions are forbidden to practice human organ transplant. If the government finds any registered institution violating the regulation, it will cancel the registration and punish the people responsible.”
We acknowledge that this is so, and wrote about it in our Report. We also noted that this legislation came into force only a few days ago on July 1st. It is not an answer to our findings about what happened before that date. Moreover, in China, there is a huge gap between enacting legislation and enforcing it.
10. The Government of China then writes:
“It is very clear that Falun Gong’s rumour has ulterior political motives.”
None of our findings are based on rumour. Every finding we make is sourced and independently verifiable.
11. The China statement then says:
“Therefore, the so called “independent investigation report” made by a few Canadians based on rumours and false allegations is groundless and biased. We do believe that lies are always lame, and will never become the truth even if being repeated 1000 times. We hope that the Canadian people will not be deceived by the disguise of the Falun Gong, and more people will be aware of the nature of “Falun Gong” as an evil cult.”
This conclusion is an attack both on us and Falun Gong. The Report has to be judged on its merits. Attacking its authors is not an appropriate response.
Secondly calling the Falun Gong an evil cult exemplifies the vilification heaped on the Falun Gong. It is this sort of slander which, in China, depersonalizes and dehumanizes the Falun Gong and makes possible the violation of their basic human rights.
Calling a group of innocent civilians an “evil cult” is a form of incitement to hatred, unacceptable in Canada. It is an abuse of their diplomatic presence in China for China to engage in this form of incitement.
For more information, please contact:
David Kilgour: (613) 747-7854 David Matas: (204) 944-1831
International Media Coverage:
http://news.google.ca/news?hl=en&lr=&ct=title&ie=UTF-8&ncl=http://www.canada.com/topics/news/world/story.html%3Fid%3D9df4db52-2add-47d0-8dae-0de19590e63a%26k%3D8603



report abuse
 

bobby fletcher

posted July 10, 2006 at 4:04 am


I read Kilgour’s Falun Gong report and I am very dissatisfied with his lack of impartiality evident in this one-sided investigation:
1) Kilgour can not divorce himself from the fact his investigation is sponsored by a Falun Gong group in Washington DC that is evidently POLITICAL, as the vilification they heaped on the Chinese government, unrelated to this allegation, demonstrates – such as “The Nine Commentaries” and “10 million peple quit the CCP” political propaganda ahead of the Chinese leader’s stateside visit.
2) The report failed to account for many contrarian facts that have brought question to Falun Gong’s claims, that are freely available outside China. Not going to China does not absolve him of his duty to critically examine ALL evidence:
* Two US government investigations started as early as 2nd week of March, independently found the allegation not credible;
* Other media investigations, including Hong Kong newspaper Takunpao with circulation in Canada also found the allegation not credible. FYI Takunpao lost their government subsidies after they reported critically on Tiananmen Square Massacre.
* Other experts have doubted Falun Gong’s claim, including Harry Wu of Laogai Research Foundation;
* Malaysian government’s prior year visit to the alleged camp, which is a joint-venture and has been open to the public for years;
* Epoch Times’ rehashing of old, unrelated stories and mis-representing autopsy photo that do not prove torture or vivisection. The fact the photo show autopsy being performed and murder investigation held by the Chinese government proves the opposite.
Clear Wisdom’s original report on Wang Bin(2000) and Liu Yufeng(2005) had no mention of organ harvesting, yet years later these stories are rehashed in Epoch Times’ 2006 organ harvesting accusation.
(Citations available in my blog)
While China’s human rights records should be examined, writing allegory of “Schindler’s List” is not the way. If we in the west can not be precise with our accusation, why should anyone take what we say seriousely?



report abuse
 

A

posted July 23, 2006 at 2:12 am


Please Help !!! Kidney for LOAN My family has serious financial problems.I want to give
one of my kidney to who can give me the LOAN of 250,000 US I’m 31 year old
woman,healthy,no alcohol,no smoking.My blood type is”B” I’m waiting for you at
dummy_pok@hotmail.com



report abuse
 

Timur

posted August 24, 2006 at 3:43 pm


“If we in the west can not be precise with our accusation, why should anyone take what we say seriousely?”
Then why dont you help with being more precise? WHy not do more investigating and find more proof. Why not discover once and for all what is happening instead of just refusing the evidence and doing nothing and, even if not intentionally, slowing down the investigation process… You said that you were against the crackdown, so why not save the lives if there are some to save and afterwards, when everything is clear, we can discuss on it. I mean, if Falun Gong are exagerating, we will know in the future, it is not necessary to (even if not intionally) slow down the investigation process. You are entitled to your opinion but I do not see where it is productive for you and for society. It seems to me that it is anti productive and it is not a logic that advances us as a society. It strongly ressembles to certain scientific logics where as long as they dont have proof of negative effects of a certain product, they will use it… Evidently, a few years later, everybody regrets because there was no investigation and it is already too late because a lot of damage to the environment was done…



report abuse
 

Makina

posted August 24, 2006 at 10:44 pm


Bob, do you understand the serious allegations put forth in the Kilgour-Matas report on organ harvesting targeting Falun Gong practitioners across China. ( http://investigation.go.saveinter.net ) The Chinese embassy has formulated a set of contradictions similar to yours which I completely disagree with–most of it is unfounded and a direct attack on the authors of the report and the Falun Gong.
http://www.theepochtimes.com/news/6-8-10/44796.html
The free world is still waiting for China to give an explanation for the 41,500 organ transplants unaccounted for (in the report). That is telling. Have the many Falun Gong practitioners who have disappeared in China become unwilling organ donors? The answer is yes.
I find it unfortunate that Mr. Harry Wu’s investigation in the North of China proved to be fruitless and that in turn his report is being used to discredit the Kilgour-Matas findings. Maybe his team should have gone there before March 9 when the story first broke in the Epoch Times. News reports confirm that after March 9th, the hospital site was cleaned up swiftly to hide all evidence and only later on the Communist Party officials invited the free world to come and investigate. But oddly enough the regime has refused to grant visas to anyone who asked to investigate further. Meanwhile the US State Dept. was taken through a show tour–the regime being with them every step of the way but they have kept the file opened and are still interested in the case.
http://www.faluninfo.net/displayAnArticle.asp?ID=9452
It’s worth mentioning that the Kilgour-Matas investigation team examined 18 pieces of evidence to draw their conclusions and that the hospital visited by the US State Dept. and Mr. Wu only accounts for a small portion of the report. Many hospitals were investigated, not just that one–so 99% of the report is not about that hospital. Moreover hospital staff openly admitted to the organ source being from the Falun Gong in 15 instances and these digital recordings have been well validated. Matas calls this practice a new from of evil on the planet.
BTW the phone bills are available. China’s bloody harvest
http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/issuesideas/story.html?id=6a97d044-615a-496b-b7d6-e79e36636592
The K-M report has been well received in their travels to Brusels, Berlin, London, Washington DC with the Australian government requesting the Chinese embassy for an independent investigation to be allowed. Kilgour has met with rights organizations which are already paying close attention to this issue as is the UN.
It is high time that Communist China be made accountable for their crimes against humanity and for the free world to reassess their take on China. As I recall China was given the 2008 Olympics on the premise that their human rights record would improve. In my eyes the well documented persecution of Falun Gong is enough to disqualify them instantly along with the reports of large scale organ harvesting which would make their record stoop to a new low.
It’s time to quit the Party Bob! http://ninecommentaries.com



report abuse
 

Mathew

posted January 19, 2007 at 4:18 pm


china medical university offering mbbs in china with english medium and training for usmle and plab exams.the china medical university now ranks top among medical universities in china.
http://www.chinamedicaluniversity.org
http://www.medicalschoolsinchina.com



report abuse
 

boy medical exam

posted July 14, 2007 at 1:23 am


Funny, interresting, nice, … this is your blog http://boymedexams.ifrance.com/



report abuse
 

doctorhorny

posted August 6, 2007 at 3:08 pm


I am surprised – interesting comments http://doctorhorny.ifrance.com



report abuse
 

theyyoung

posted August 15, 2007 at 2:36 pm


Lovely, I must say, there is not so much themes, which deserve a comment. This one is realy needful http://boy-gay.jimka-mmsa.com



report abuse
 

gay medical fetish

posted September 16, 2007 at 5:20 am


Interesting I was looking for some answer and you gave them to me http://gaymedical.ifrance.com/



report abuse
 

doctorhorny

posted December 12, 2007 at 3:46 pm


Very useful comments – good to read http://gaymedicalfetish.spazioblog.it/



report abuse
 

gay male spankings

posted January 1, 2008 at 4:38 pm


Lovely, I must say, there is not so much themes, which deserve a comment. This one is realy needful http://spankzilla.spazioblog.it/



report abuse
 

Post a Comment

By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.



Previous Posts

There is nothing I shall want
A couple of weeks ago, a memorial Mass for Michael was held here in Birmingham at the Cathedral. The bishop presided and offered a very nice, even charming homily in which he first focused on the Scripture readings of the day, and then turned to Michael, whom he remembered, among other things, as on

posted 9:24:16am Mar. 05, 2009 | read full post »

Revolutionary Road - Is it just me?
Why am I the only person I know..or even "know" in the Internet sense of "knowing"  - who didn't hate it? I didn't love it, either. There was a lot wrong with it. Weak characterization. Miscasting. Anvil-wielding mentally ill prophets.But here's the thing.Whether or not Yates' original novel in

posted 9:45:04pm Mar. 04, 2009 | read full post »

Books for Lent
No, I'm not going to ask you about your Lenten reading lists...although I might.Not today, though. This post is about giving books to others. For Lent, and a long time after that. You know how it goes during Lent: Prayer, Fasting and Almsgiving, right?Well, here's a worthy recipient for your hard-

posted 9:22:07pm Mar. 04, 2009 | read full post »

Why Via Media
How about....because I'm lame and hate thinking up titles to things? No?Okay...how about...St. Benedict? Yes, yes, I know the association with Anglicanism. That wasn't invovled in my purpose in naming the joint, but if draws some Googling Episcopalians, all the better.To tell the truth, you can bl

posted 8:54:17pm Mar. 04, 2009 | read full post »

Brave Heart?
I don't know about you, but one of effects of childbirth on me was a compulsion to spill the details. All of them.The whole thing was fascinating to me, so of course I assumed everyone else should be fascinated as well in the recounting of every minute of labor, describing the intensity of discomfor

posted 10:19:45pm Mar. 03, 2009 | read full post »




Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.