Plundered for their Organs

mamadrama

The Living Force
Recently, Sott has published a spate of articles exposing yet one more horrific aspect of the pathocratic nature of Israel as it murders and abducts Palestians for their organs. Just a few weeks ago a ring of American Rabbis were arrested in New Jersey upon suspicion of human organs trafficking (among many other crimes) which highlighted an even more disturbing trend that includes a worldwide network of illegal organ trafficking. To make matters even more troubling, since the Uniform Anatomical Gift Act of 1968 that redefined death to include the total cessation of brain function (which significantly increased the opportunity to procure organs from patients of neurotrauma), both the medical and legal establishments have continued to blur and move the lines of what constitutes an actual death. If we do not have clear and accurate criteria for determining death and as it becomes more difficult for people to distinguish which patient is alive or which one merely looks alive but is "dead" according to the medical community, we run the risk of intentionally or unintentionally killing one person for the sake of another and ignoring the intimate and moral significance of an individual reducing people to nothing more than a container of usable parts to be sold to the highest bidder.

http://www.sott.net/articles/show/192096-Our-sons-plundered-for-their-organs-

You could call me a "matchmaker," said Levy Izhak Rosenbaum, from Brooklyn, USA, in a secret recording with an FBI-agent whom he believed to be a client. Ten days later, at the end of July this year, Rosenbaum was arrested and a vast, Sopranos-like, imbroglio of money-laundering and illegal organ-trade was revealed. Rosenbaum's matchmaking had nothing to do with romance. It was all about buying and selling kidneys from Israel on the black market. Rosenbaum says that he buys the kidneys for $10,000, from poor people. He then proceeds to sell the organs to desperate patients in the States for $160,000. The accusations have shaken the American transplantation business. If they are true it means that organ trafficking is documented for the first time in the US, experts tell the New Jersey Real-Time News.

On the question of how many organs he has sold Rosenbaum replies: "Quite a lot. And I have never failed," he boasts. The business has been running for quite some time. Francis Delmonici, professor of transplant surgery at Harvard and member of the National Kidney Foundation's Board of Directors, tells the same newspaper that organ-trafficking, similar to the one reported from Israel, is carried out in other places of the world as well. 5 - 6,000 operations a year, about ten per cent of the world's kidney transplants are carried out illegally, according to Delmonici.

Countries suspected of these activities are Pakistan, the Philippines and China, where the organs are allegedly taken from executed prisoners. But Palestinians also harbor strong suspicions against Israel for seizing young men and having them serve as the country's organ reserve - a very serious accusation, with enough question marks to motivate the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to start an investigation about possible war crimes.

Israel has repeatedly been under fire for its unethical ways of dealing with organs and transplants. France was among the countries that ceased organ collaboration with Israel in the nineties. Jerusalem Post wrote that "the rest of the European countries are expected to follow France's example shortly."

Half of the kidneys transplanted to Israelis since the beginning of the 2000s have been bought illegally from Turkey, Eastern Europe or Latin America. Israeli health authorities have full knowledge of this business but do nothing to stop it. At a conference in 2003 it was shown that Israel is the only western country with a medical profession that doesn't condemn the illegal organ trade. The country takes no legal measures against doctors participating in the illegal business - on the contrary, chief medical officers of Israel's big hospitals are involved in most of the illegal transplants, according to Dagens Nyheter (December 5, 2003).

In the summer of 1992, Ehud Olmert, then minister of health, tried to address the issue of organ shortage by launching a big campaign aimed at having the Israeli public register for post mortem organ donation. Half a million pamphlets were spread in local newspapers. Ehud Olmert himself was the first person to sign up. A couple of weeks later the Jerusalem Post reported that the campaign was a success. No fewer than 35,000 people had signed up. Prior to the campaign it would have been 500 in a normal month. In the same article, however, Judy Siegel, the reporter, wrote that the gap between supply and demand was still large. 500 people were in line for a kidney transplant, but only 124 transplants could be performed. Of 45 people in need of a new liver, only three could be operated on in Israel.

While the campaign was running, young Palestinian men started to disappear from villages in the West Bank and Gaza. After five days Israeli soldiers would bring them back dead, with their bodies ripped open.

Talk of the bodies terrified the population of the occupied territories. There were rumors of a dramatic increase of young men disappearing, with ensuing nightly funerals of autopsied bodies.

I was in the area at the time, working on a book. On several occasions I was approached by UN staff concerned about the developments. The persons contacting me said that organ theft definitely occurred but that they were prevented from doing anything about it. On an assignment from a broadcasting network I then travelled around interviewing a great number of Palestinian families in the West Bank and Gaza - meeting parents who told of how their sons had been deprived of organs before being killed. One example that I encountered on this eerie trip was the young stone-thrower Bilal Achmed Ghanan.

It was close to midnight when the motor roar from an Israeli military column sounded from the outskirts of Imatin, a small village in the northern parts of the West Bank. The two thousand inhabitants were awake. They were still, waiting, like silent shadows in the dark, some lying upon roofs, others hiding behind curtains, walls, or trees that provided protection during the curfew but still offered a full view toward what would become the grave for the first martyr of the village. The military had interrupted the electricity and the area was now a closed-off military zone - not even a cat could move outdoors without risking its life. The overpowering silence of the dark night was only interrupted by quiet sobbing. I don't remember if our shivering was due to the cold or to the tension. Five days earlier, on May 13, 1992, an Israeli special force had used the village's carpentry workshop for an ambush. The person they were assigned to put out of action was Bilal Achmed Ghanan, one of the stone-throwing Palestinian youngsters who made life difficult for the Israeli soldiers.

As one of the leading stone-throwers Bilal Ghanan had been wanted by the military for a couple of years. Together with other stone-throwing boys he hid in the Nablus mountains, with no roof over his head. Getting caught meant torture and death for these boys - they had to stay in the mountains at all costs.

On May 13 Bilal made an exception, when for some reason, he walked unprotected past the carpentry workshop. Not even Talal, his older brother, knows why he took this risk. Maybe the boys were out of food and needed to restock.

Everything went according to plan for the Israeli special force. The soldiers stubbed their cigarettes, put away their cans of Coca-Cola, and calmly aimed through the broken window. When Bilal was close enough they needed only to pull the triggers. The first shot hit him in the chest. According to villagers who witnessed the incident he was subsequently shot with one bullet in each leg. Two soldiers then ran down from the carpentry workshop and shot Bilal once in the stomach. Finally, they grabbed him by his feet and dragged him up the twenty stone steps of the workshop stair. Villagers say that people from both the UN and the Red Crescent were close by, heard the discharge and came to look for wounded people in need of care. Some arguing took place as to who should take care of the victim. Discussions ended with Israeli soldiers loading the badly wounded Bilal in a jeep and driving him to the outskirts of the village, where a military helicopter waited. The boy was flown to a destination unknown to his family. Five days later he came back, dead and wrapped in green hospital fabric.

A villager recognized Captain Yahya, the leader of the military column who had transported Bilal from the postmortem center Abu Kabir, outside of Tel Aviv, to the place for his final rest. "Captain Yahya is the worst of them all," the villager whispered in my ear. After Yahya had unloaded the body and changed the green fabric for a light cotton one, some male relatives of the victim were chosen by the soldiers to do the job of digging and mixing cement.

Together with the sharp noises from the shovels we could hear laughter from the soldiers who, as they waited to go home, exchanged some jokes. As Bilal was put in the grave his chest was uncovered. Suddenly it became clear to the few people present just what kind of abuse the boy had been exposed to. Bilal was not by far the first young Palestinian to be buried with a slit from his abdomen up to his chin.

The families in the West Bank and in Gaza felt that they knew exactly what had happened: "Our sons are used as involuntary organ donors," relatives of Khaled from Nablus told me, as did the mother of Raed from Jenin and the uncles of Machmod and Nafes from Gaza, who had all disappeared for a number of days only to return at night, dead and autopsied.

"Why are they keeping the bodies for up to five days before they let us bury them? What happened to the bodies during that time? Why are they performing an autopsy, against our will, when the cause of death is obvious? Why are the bodies returned at night? Why is it done with a military escort? Why is the area closed off during the funeral? Why is the electricity interrupted?" Nafe's uncle was upset and he had a lot of questions.

The relatives of the dead Palestinians no longer harbored any doubts as to the reasons for the killings, but the spokesperson for the Israeli army claimed that the allegations of organ theft were lies. All the Palestinian victims go through autopsy on a routine basis, he said. Bilal Achmed Ghanem was one of 133 Palestinians killed in various ways that year. According to the Palestinian statistics the causes of death were: shot in the street, explosion, tear gas, deliberately run over, hanged in prison, shot in school, killed at home etcetera. The 133 people killed were between four months to 88 years old. Only half of them, 69 victims, went through postmortem examination. The routine autopsy of killed Palestinians - of which the army spokesperson was talking - has no bearing on the reality in the occupied territories. The questions remain.

We know that Israel has a great need for organs, that there is a vast and illegal trade of organs which has been running for many years now, that the authorities are aware of it and that doctors in managing positions at the big hospitals participate, as well as civil servants at various levels. We also know that young Palestinian men disappeared, that they were brought back after five days, at night, under tremendous secrecy, stitched back together after having been cut from abdomen to chin.

It's time to bring clarity to this macabre business, to shed light on what is going on and what has taken place in the territories occupied by Israel since the Intifada began.

Here are links to some of the other Sott articles on this topic.

http://www.sott.net/articles/show/192157-Nice-Soldiers-Die-First

http://www.sott.net/articles/show/191665-Israeli-trade-in-Palestinian-body-parts-The-IDF-Israel-s-Organ-Grinder

http://www.sott.net/articles/show/192144-The-Return-of-the-Body-Snatchers

http://www.sott.net/articles/show/192107-Most-China-organ-transplants-come-from-death-row

http://www.sott.net/articles/show/192251-Israeli-Organ-Harvesting-The-New-Blood-Libel-
 
Black Swan said:
Recently, Sott has published a spate of articles exposing yet one more horrific aspect of the pathocratic nature of Israel as it murders and abducts Palestians for their organs. Just a few weeks ago a ring of American Rabbis were arrested in New Jersey upon suspicion of human organs trafficking (among many other crimes) which highlighted an even more disturbing trend that includes a worldwide network of illegal organ trafficking. To make matters even more troubling, since the Uniform Anatomical Gift Act of 1968 that redefined death to include the total cessation of brain function (which significantly increased the opportunity to procure organs from patients of neurotrauma), both the medical and legal establishments have continued to blur and move the lines of what constitutes an actual death. If we do not have clear and accurate criteria for determining death and as it becomes more difficult for people to distinguish which patient is alive or which one merely looks alive according to the medical community, we run the risk of intentionally or unintentionally killing one person for the sake of another and ignoring the intimate and moral significance of an individual reducing people to nothing more than a container of usable parts to be sold to the highest bidder.
The blurring of the criteria for declaring a person legally dead is a serious example of ponerology in action. What you posted requires a discussion of the ethical implications for legal organ donation. So thanks for posting as I've had discussions regarding this very topic with family members in the past. A significant proportion of the legally donated organs are from individuals that signed up to be donors in the event of accidental death. Some of these are individuals that are declared brain or cardiac dead after a traumatic injury. But is brain or cardiac death really equivalent to being dead? The Terry Schiavo issue from a few years ago demonstrated how divided and also how ignorant many are when it comes to terms like "all but dead" or legally dead." Some would argue that there is no issue because brain and cardiac death is clearly defined but I disagree because that definition is a legal one based on consensus medical knowledge, and we know consensus medical knowledge can be very wrong in addition to being ethically challenged.

In some communities, like mine (african american), there is a serious distrust of the medical establishment. There is a shortage of organ donors and according to the latest statistics, African Americans spend twice as much time on organ wait lists compared to European Americans. It's due to this lack of donors they say. AA are no more STS than any other group-at least I dont' think so.
I have struggled with deciding on signing up as a donor in the past. My parents begged me not to and their reasoning relates to this issue of distrust and fears of being allowed to die so our organs can be harvested. After reading timeline and this book, for an ethics in psychology course, it is not an irrational fear. In fact it's rather rational when we consider ponerology.

I don't think that the majority of people who work in medicine are like the practitioners described in those writings I linked above. However, like those doctors and researchers, most practitioners today believe in consensus medical knowledge. The problem with consensus medical knowledge is that often some things are not considered. If they are considered but don't fit, they are left out entirely. I often think that when the term "brain dead" is used, allopathic medicine does not take into consideration the brain as a system within the larger system of the body. A lot of what is known is based on reductionist one cell at a time thinking.

As a brain scientist myself, I am fully aware that there is a lot that we don't know about the brain. The binding question in neuroscience -what is consciousness.- is unexplained. I think we are sometimes too quick to use the term "brain dead." I also wonder how ethically sound it is as a criteria for deciding that an individual's organs and tissue are ok for donation. I know that "brain dead" is a legal definition that includes wording about 'irreversible cessation of brain activity including automatic functions that control the body but I can't help but wonder how many of those who are said to fit the criteria and end up with their organs and tissue donated legally, really did fit that criteria.

brainwave.
 
And then, some kids had come alive after 40 minutes of "being dead" in submerged frigid waters. They had no heart beat, no respiration and for a significant amount of time, and they also survived without brain damage, as the brain was in a "frozen state".

This concept is applied in surgery as well, where all cessation of blood flow is needed to perform the surgery, for example some cardiovascular or brain vessel surgeries. So there is no blood flow in any blood vessel (including arteries feeding the brain). The brain is cooled down (deep hypothermia) so it can tolerate complete cessation of blood flow and the surgery will have to be done very quickly, if it lasts longer, there is greater risk of brain damage, etc.

During that time, every single vital signal is monitored and it can be observed that it indeed stops, there is no heart beat, no respiration, no brain activity. Person is absolutely dead by every clinical criteria.

Yet, I've read at least a case where a person waking up from this kind of surgery remembers a conversation that happened between the surgical staff while the person was supposedly dead.

If we follow the line of how the brain works according to science, then, it will be basically impossible for this person to have a memory of any conversation. There was absence of all cortical electrical activity, so supposedly, no new memories could have been created. And yet it happened and it was clear that the person recalled a conversation that really happened between the surgical staff and the person was able to say how the surgical staff looked liked.

This is experience differs from other experiences while being under anesthesia, the person is not only under anesthesia, but the person is "dead".

So that is another thing, where is our consciousness and where is the line of life and death in all of this.
 
Black Swan said:
Recently, Sott has published a spate of articles exposing yet one more horrific aspect of the pathocratic nature of Israel as it murders and abducts Palestians for their organs. Just a few weeks ago a ring of American Rabbis were arrested in New Jersey upon suspicion of human organs trafficking (among many other crimes) which highlighted an even more disturbing trend that includes a worldwide network of illegal organ trafficking. To make matters even more troubling, since the Uniform Anatomical Gift Act of 1968 that redefined death to include the total cessation of brain function (which significantly increased the opportunity to procure organs from patients of neurotrauma), both the medical and legal establishments have continued to blur and move the lines of what constitutes an actual death. If we do not have clear and accurate criteria for determining death and as it becomes more difficult for people to distinguish which patient is alive or which one merely looks alive but is "dead" according to the medical community, we run the risk of intentionally or unintentionally killing one person for the sake of another and ignoring the intimate and moral significance of an individual reducing people to nothing more than a container of usable parts to be sold to the highest bidder.

It is interesting question how the entire system is setup like this.

IF one says to a his KID ' don't take cookie' and keep the cookie at a place where he knows and he take its and parent doesn't do any thing, what Kid understands is HE CAN TAKE THE COOKIE and it is alright to ignore command. when some body says Don't take Cookie means it not only reminding the kid of Cookie and at the same time take the cookie.

This is exactly what happens in every law, drug prevention laws, organ donation laws, any ethical laws etc . Ethics in this ponerised psychopathic system comes with opposite presuppositions. STS works in path of least resistance. Trojan Horse concept works very well for STS.

In the case of driver registration where they repeatedly ask for organ donation, pressing the altruistic emotional buttons. Once one agree for it , trojan horse is in . same thing is true with once one person join in the Hospital. What else you have a choice. how many people have the correct knowledge and courage to fight with their family pressures to rely on the knowledge they have. particularly on the bed.

If one is on the bed with official unclear brain dead laws, and doctor's boss ( or a authority or education or other financial motives , legal/illegal , director or indirect reasons )says, time to remove the organ . what choices this over worked doctor (even if he is ethical and non greedy and spiritualistic and empathic ) have?. How long the doctor will resist?. Not long.

when I was surprised when once C's mentioned that 'Hospitals are the places where most deaths happen'.

Q: (LM) I find that hard to believe. (F) Is SVS*** a robot? (LM) When did she die?
A: Open. All it takes is a "hospital visit." [Laura's note: To my knowledge, SVS*** has been
hospitalized for surgery at least twice.]
this is exlcuding the how doctors ignore nutritional food as a decease prevention mechanism ( thus causing all the ills of the people ) and prescribe the insane poisons in the name of drugs or bombarding the death rays in the name of prevention mechanism and removing the organs when people are alive, because they are forced to follow the medical laws and insurance laws for their existence. One of my doctor once complainted that 'he is becoming more like insurance agent than his duties "

psychopaths are good at creating these trojan horses and hiding inside and open the doors the for plunder.

what a reality we live in and Sleep
 
It seems that for many doctors "brain dead" is cessation of brain function while the heart is still beating and the patient is being mechanically ventilated That does not constitute "dead" as far as I am concerned. It is undoubtedly very appealing to doctors to extract organs while the heart is still beating and organs still receiving blood flow etc. but if the heart is still beating and pumping blood around the body then the patient is still alive in a very significant way. For me, "dead" is when there is no heart beat, no respiration, for a significant amount of time, and by significant amount of time I mean 12-24 hours.
 
Psyche said:
Yet, I've read at least a case where a person waking up from this kind of surgery remembers a conversation that happened between the surgical staff while the person was supposedly dead.

Well, apparently there are much worse and nightmarish scenarios than just waking up and remembering the surgical staff conversations. Here, take a look at this article.

"Patients say it feels like being trapped in a corpse: They awake during surgery, unable to move or scream. Some remember hearing their surgeons talk, and a few recall feeling intense pain.

Some experts have said special brain-wave monitors were the best way to prevent anesthesia awareness. Now, in a big setback for efforts to prevent it, the first large, independent test of the monitors shows they are no better than older technology.[...]

Dr. Jeffrey Apfelbaum, president of the American Society of Anesthesiologists, who was not involved in the study, said there is “tremendous pressure” from industry and patient advocates to use the brain-wave technology, despite the lack of solid evidence that it works better.

The position of the anesthesiologists group has been that brain-wave monitoring should not be done routinely, but may be helpful for certain patients at high risk of awareness. But widespread use would be very costly."
 
brainwave said:
I have struggled with deciding on signing up as a donor in the past. My parents begged me not to and their reasoning relates to this issue of distrust and fears of being allowed to die so our organs can be harvested.

I heard of such fears, and even if personally never had a problem with my organs being used for transfer or science, I was always very hesitant and resistant about listing myself as a donor.

seek10 said:
In the case of driver registration where they repeatedly ask for organ donation, pressing the altruistic emotional buttons. Once one agree for it , trojan horse is in . same thing is true with once one person join in the Hospital. What else you have a choice. how many people have the correct knowledge and courage to fight with their family pressures to rely on the knowledge they have. particularly on the bed.

Couple of years ago Israeli authorities initiated very aggressive campaign of signing people on transplant cards. They used every tactic they could - listing celebrities, playing on people's emotions like calling them selfish, etc (the same they did with youngsters avoiding to enlist to the army. It began in parallel with Iranian threat
hysteria, so at that time I thought that it was just to much of a coincidence.

Now, considering the recent info about Palestinian organs trafficking (it is actually not that new) it sounds even more like an organized effort to either perform experiments or to get an access to large supply of organs in case of big disaster or regional war. And if the war with many casualties will indeed happen, it will be much easier to conceal organs trafficking using excuses that under such circumstances it is much harder to do everything in order to save a person.

brainwave said:
As a brain scientist myself, I am fully aware that there is a lot that we don't know about the brain. The binding question in neuroscience -what is consciousness.- is unexplained. I think we are sometimes too quick to use the term "brain dead." I also wonder how ethically sound it is as a criteria for deciding that an individual's organs and tissue are ok for donation. I know that "brain dead" is a legal definition that includes wording about 'irreversible cessation of brain activity including automatic functions that control the body but I can't help but wonder how many of those who are said to fit the criteria and end up with their organs and tissue donated legally, really did fit that criteria.

While I can understand the problem legal definition of "brain death" may present in the case of organs donation, I wonder what kind of criteria (clinical and ethical) might be applied to coma patients. I hope that I will never find myself in this situation, either as a patient or as a friend of relative of someone, because to me it seems like a nightmarish scenario where someone can be literally trapped in the body because legal definition of being dead doesn't apply to this someone's case. And also since there is no apparent suffering, there are no grounds for euthanasia. Any thoughts on that?
 
Keit said:
Psyche said:
Yet, I've read at least a case where a person waking up from this kind of surgery remembers a conversation that happened between the surgical staff while the person was supposedly dead.

Well, apparently there are much worse and nightmarish scenarios than just waking up and remembering the surgical staff conversations.

Indeed. In fact, a few years back this scenario was introduced into a film, Awake (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0211933/). I remember after watching it I was pretty freaked out about ever having to be given anesthesia in the future. That would have to be one of the most torturous times for anybody to have to experience. Although, the statistics say that the chances of this happening are very, very rare - 1:14000 - just the possibility is enough to make one scared of "going under" during surgery.

I've also read in a few places how comatose patients exhibit memory recall. So I think it's definitely an ambiguous area in regards to when is the body/mind really dead.
 
Keit said:
"Patients say it feels like being trapped in a corpse: They awake during surgery, unable to move or scream. Some remember hearing their surgeons talk, and a few recall feeling intense pain.


This happened to my mother during her abdominal surgery. She remembers it as one of the most horrifying experiences in her life. She felt her surgeon going through her organs and read him commenting on how he doesn't see any pathology here and there; the pain was tremendous. Thankfully for her, the sensation was brief and she drifted off again soon.

Couple of years ago Israeli authorities initiated very aggressive campaign of signing people on transplant cards [..] it sounds even more like an organized effort to either perform experiments or to get an access to large supply of organs in case of big disaster or regional war.


fwiw, my husband said that, when he was getting his driver's license, his mother always told him -- and all the relatives backed her up -- not to list himself as an organ donor. They said that if you are an organ donor and, god forbid, get into an accident or smth, the doctors wouldn't make much of an effort to save you. They didn't know anyone to whom it actually happened, but that was their superstition, I guess. They were Italian immigrants who struggled financially for a couple of generations. None of his college or work friends with a more stable upbringing ever heard of this, such stories weren't part of their folklore. Which makes me think of the differences b\w how the lower and upper class are treated in the medical system, such beliefs don't just appear out of nowhere.

There is also this article on organ trafficking being a problem even in America, it was posted on SOTT:

\\\http://www.newsweek.com/id/178873

This is not about end-of-life decisions but rather about profitable transactions b\w conscious parties. What amazed me most is not even the subject matter but the commentaries to the article: most of them support legalization of this trade. The topic is very charged.
 
Hildegarda said:
fwiw, my husband said that, when he was getting his driver's license, his mother always told him -- and all the relatives backed her up -- not to list himself as an organ donor. They said that if you are an organ donor and, god forbid, get into an accident or smth, the doctors wouldn't make much of an effort to save you.

Fwiw, as a hospital chaplain I do not see evidence of this but of course I don't see everything that goes on. There's always the possibility it's different in inner city hospitals that primarily serve the poor, don't know. The official response to this is:

United Network for Organ Sharing said:
Myth: If emergency room doctors know you're an organ donor, they won't work as hard to save you.

Fact: If you are sick or injured and admitted to the hospital, the number one priority is to save your life. Organ donation can only be considered after brain death has been declared by a physician. Many states have adopted legislation allowing individuals to legally designate their wish to be a donor should brain death occur, although in many states Organ Procurement Organizations also require consent from the donor's family.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Myth: When you're waiting for a transplant, your financial or celebrity status is as important as your medical status.

Fact: When you are on the transplant waiting list for a donor organ, what really counts is the severity of your illness, time spent waiting, blood type, and other important medical information.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Myth: Having "organ donor" noted on your driver's license or carrying a donor card is all you have to do to become a donor.

Fact: While a signed donor card and a driver's license with an "organ donor" designation are legal documents, organ and tissue donation is usually discussed with family members prior to the donation. To ensure that your family understands your wishes, it is important that you tell your family about your decision to donate LIFE.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Myth: Only hearts, livers, and kidneys can be transplanted.

Fact: Needed organs include the heart, kidneys, pancreas, lungs, liver, and intestines. Tissue that can be donated include the eyes, skin, bone, heart valves and tendons.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Myth: Your history of medical illness means your organs or tissues are unfit for donation.

Fact: At the time of death, the appropriate medical professionals will review your medical and social histories to determine whether or not you can be a donor. With recent advances in transplantation, many more people than ever before can be donors. It's best to tell your family your wishes and sign up to be an organ and tissue donor on your driver's license or an official donor document.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Myth: You are too old to be a donor.

Fact: People of all ages and medical histories should consider themselves potential donors. Your medical condition at the time of death will determine what organs and tissue can be donated.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Myth: If you agree to donate your organs, your family will be charged for the costs.

Fact: There is no cost to the donor's family or estate for organ and tissue donation. Funeral costs remain the responsibility of the family.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Myth: Organ donation disfigures the body and changes the way it looks in a casket.

Fact: Donated organs are removed surgically, in a routine operation similar to gallbladder or appendix removal. Donation does not change the appearance of the body for the funeral service.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Myth: Your religion prohibits organ donation.

Fact: All major organized religions approve of organ and tissue donation and consider it an act of charity.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Myth: There is real danger of being heavily drugged, then waking to find you have had one kidney (or both) removed for a black market transplant.

Fact: This tale has been widely circulated over the Internet. There is absolutely no evidence of such activity ever occurring in the U.S. While the tale may sound credible, it has no basis in the reality of organ transplantation. Many people who hear the myth probably dismiss it, but it is possible that some believe it and decide against organ donation out of needless fear.

_http://www.unos.org/News/myths.asp


Hildegarda said:
They didn't know anyone to whom it actually happened, but that was their superstition, I guess. They were Italian immigrants who struggled financially for a couple of generations. None of his college or work friends with a more stable upbringing ever heard of this, such stories weren't part of their folklore. Which makes me think of the differences b\w how the lower and upper class are treated in the medical system, such beliefs don't just appear out of nowhere.

Well, considering that organ harvesting is being perpetrated by Israel and other countries and an American ring of Rabbis were charged with illegal organs trafficking (which the FBI has known about for at least 7 years), it's clear something nefarious is going on which imo casts a dark shadow on the whole process of organ donation.

As mentioned before, another disturbing aspect of all this is the continued blurring of the line in what constitutes death. The entire concept of brain death continues to be a subject of international debate. Up to this point in transplant history, the public, not to mention every organ donor family, has been assured that brain death meant total and irreversible cessation of brain function, including brain stem. But there are a few studies that have shown that when organ procurement is undertaken, patients who have fulfilled the tests for brain death often respond to surgical incision with a significant rise in both blood pressure and heart rate. This would be an expected response of the body to external stimuli in a non-brain-dead subject, but does not support the claim of total cessation of brain function in those declared brain dead. So, I am deeply concerned about this because to me it signifies there is a good possibility that at least sometimes, the brain dead patient experiences pain during organ procurement which means there has not been total and irreversible cessation of brain function so they are not indeed dead! It's very troubling to say the least.
 
Hello everyone,

Well, I am not an organ dοnor, but i used to be a blood donor. They called me again some days ago saying that there is a great need for blood. And i would continue to be, until i learned from a friendly doctor working in the regional hospital here, that during summertime most of the local hospital's supply of blood is spent treating people who had a punctured stomach after consuming (and trying to digest) too much meat during the summer feasts held in Greek villages, where they eat like "there is no tomorrow" as we say.

I don't think these obese meat eaters, who happily and without questions serve all this industrialized animal cruelty and exploitation, should get a drop of my blood. I reserve my right to donate my blood only for specific situations whose details i am aware of and it is clear that there is a real and unfortunate medical need. And that only after i know that all the capable and healthy first degree relatives of the person in need have first donated themselves. In many cases i was called to give blood by such relatives who in essence did nothing other to help their own than phone calls to other people. I consider this a kind of manipulation and i refuse to offer my help anymore. Also, making the choice to offer your blood for a specific patient is not considered a "donation" in papers, as "donors" are supposed to give directly to the hospital's blood bank and thus my official donor card is no longer valid.

I would dare to apply the same principal in organ donation too, if it was possible. If i knew that my organs can help a real and conscious human being in need and sustain his life, i would certainly offer them after my death. If only i knew that the person i am offering this life extension is not a psychopath , a narcissist or a wealthy guy who ruined his own organs from drug addictions or similar reason. So i guess this is like another application of the Law of the Three, where each case should be examined individually to define the delicate balance between right or wrong. My point is that i think the current system running either blood or organ donations cannot take into account such fine details, and for that reason i personally refuse to take part in it. IMO, we should have to be the judge of where our blood and/or organs are donated, and not the dubious guilt of the "health professionals" in a time when pathocracy rules. That is my 2cc on the subject FWIW.

Thank you
:)
 
Judaism is founded on the racist concept that Jews are God's “chosen people”. Murdering Palestinians for their organs
is the logical conclusion of thousands of years of an ideology asserting all but Jews are beasts to be used as one would
use a cow or a chicken. Israel Shamir quotes Rabbi Yitzhak Ginzburgh's attitude toward human beings
unfortunate enough not to be born Jewish. The psychopathic state of Israel not only colonizes the land of Palestine, but it
has gone the further step of colonizing the bodies of Palestinians.

http://www.sott.net/articles/show/192144-The-Return-of-the-Body-Snatchers

Israel Shamir said:
Israelis were the doctors, traffickers, smugglers and recipients of the body parts, as the Jewish state is the only country in the world where the state pays for, and best doctors are legally engaged in, the transplanting of illegally obtained organs, reported Ha'aretz. The next step was the evolution of international networks for this sort of traffic. Jews are well positioned to get involved in this sordid business: there are many Jewish doctors, there are many ties between Jewish communities in different countries, and there are few moral inhibitions.

This lack of moral inhibitions allowed a leading Chabad rabbi, Yitzhak Ginzburgh, to give his religious permission to a Jew to take a liver from a goy even without his consent. He said that "a Jew is entitled to extract the liver from a goy if he needs it, for the life of a Jew is more valuable than the life of a goy, likewise the life of a goy is more valuable than the life of an animal."
 
Myth: There is real danger of being heavily drugged, then waking to find you have had one kidney (or both) removed for a black market transplant.

Fact: This tale has been widely circulated over the Internet. There is absolutely no evidence of such activity ever occurring in the U.S. While the tale may sound credible, it has no basis in the reality of organ transplantation. Many people who hear the myth probably dismiss it, but it is possible that some believe it and decide against organ donation out of needless fear.

I seriously LOLed at this one. This is quite well known fact that this happens daily in eastern european countries and maybe i am doin wrong assumption here but I am pretty sure that it happens in US as well :shock:
 
Israeli doc admits harvesting organs
RAMALLAH: The chief Israeli pathologist and director of the Institute of Forensic Medicine at Abu Kabir, professor Yehuda Hiss, has admitted harvesting organs from the bodies of dead Palestinians without the consent of their families.

Hiss said that he and doctors who worked under him took parts from bodies — including skin, corneas and heart valves — in the 1990s for transplantation. He also admitted that the same parts were taken from dead Israelis for the same purpose.

Hiss’ remarks came in an interview with Nancy Sheppard-Hughes, a professor of anthropology at the University of California-Berkeley who tracks the organ trade worldwide. The one-hour interview was recorded in 2000 as part of Sheppard-Hughes’ study at Abu Kabir and was broadcast on Israeli television on Friday night.

The report said Sheppard-Hughes decided to publish the interview after the leading Swedish daily Aftonbladet reported in August that Israeli soldiers killed Palestinians to trade in their organs.

The Israeli pathologist said “the skins were taken from the bodies and transmitted to Hadasah hospital in Jerusalem on the request of Israeli Army to be transplanted to wounded soldiers and in case of disaster.”

Sheppard-Hughes said the taking of organs “was not only from Palestinians and the bodies of terrorists, but all people. The symbolism is of taking the parts from a population which is considered enemy for military uses. This has to be reconsidered.”

In August, Aftonbladet quoted Palestinians as saying that young men from the West Bank and Gaza Strip had been seized by the Israeli forces and that their bodies returned to their families with missing organs.

“’Our sons are used as involuntary organ donors,’ relatives of Khaled from Nablus said to me, as did the mother of Ra’ed from Jenin as well as the uncles of Mahmoud and Nafez from Gaza, who all had disappeared for a few days and returned by night, dead and autopsied,” wrote author Donald Bostrِm in his report.

Bostrِm also cited an incident of alleged organ snatching in 1992 during the first intifada.

He said Israeli soldiers seized a young man known for throwing stones at Israeli troops in the Nablus area. The man had been shot in the chest, both legs and the stomach before being taken to a military helicopter which transported him to “a place unknown to his loved ones.”

Five nights later, Bostrِm says, the young man’s body was returned, wrapped in green hospital sheets.

link to the article _http://www.arabnews.com/?page=4&section=0&article=129893&d=20&m=12&y=2009
 
Josef Mengele is the notorious Nazi doctor charged with war crimes for experimenting on Jewish prisoners of Auschwitz
Concentration Camp. Israel and Jews who support the criminal State of Israel now have their own
“Death Angel”. He is Dr. Yehuda Hiss , who admits on film that the bodies of murdered Palestinians have been used for scientific research .” Death Angel” Yehuda Hiss is the chief of pathology at the Abu Kabir Forensic Institute in Tel Aviv. His brazen admission of crimes against humanity are detailed in the following article. When will humanity bring this criminal to justice?

http://www.sott.net/articles/show/199459-Is-Israel-a-State-or-An-Organ-Stealing-Mafia- said:
On Sunday December 20 2009, Tel Aviv, The Israeli television Channel 2 reported that the organs of the dead Palestinians were stolen in hospitals. The TV report stated that many corneas and bones - long bones - and the skin from the back, were extracted from the bodies of Palestinians, without the consent of their families.

Despite the denials of the doctors who work in the autopsy institute stealing organs, the Israeli television showed a tape of length of 57 minutes which was filmed in the Institute by "Judea Hiss" (Yehuda Hiss), the director of Abu Kabir Institute, who served as an official medical autopsy and judiciary in Israel. Yehuda Hiss released the video which shows how doctors were extracting the organs of the dead, and what was happening in the dark rooms of the Institute of Autopsy.

According to what was seen in the film, since the early eighties until the end of 2000, while Hiss was in charge of the Institute of Forensic Medicine, everything was happening under the authority of Hiss, and signed under his name. The organs of Palestinians and other dead people were taken and implanted in the bodies of Jewish patients.

The video showed how Dr. Hiss did not hesitate to tell to the doctors working with him to "Take from the dead very quickly! Take corneas and implant them into the patients in need". The video also showed how Dr. Hiss was himself extracting organs from cadavers.

Hiss was heard in the video saying: "We were taking the corneas without taking out the eyes, and then we covered the place of the cornea and closed the eye. We did that as scientific research."
 
Back
Top Bottom