This Breaking Organ Harvest Scandal
Shmendrik
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/dec/20/israel-admits-harvesting-pale
stinian-organs ]
In another group we had this terrible link laid on us . . .
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/dec/20/israel-admits-harvesting-...
This led one poster to ask isn't such a thing against Torah?
I answered that of course it is! And that many levitical rituals of
purification must follow any such defilement of uncleanness . . .
Leviticus 5: 2 Or if a soul touch any unclean thing, whether it be a
carcase of an unclean beast, or a carcase of unclean cattle, or the
carcase of unclean creeping things, and if it be hidden from him; he
also shall be unclean, and guilty. 3 Or if he touch the uncleanness
of man, whatsoever uncleanness it be that a man shall be defiled
withal, and it be hid from him; when he knoweth of it, then he shall
be guilty.
--
Tempting though it may be to look on the bright side of these
revelations, such as to note how good it is to see that finally Israel
has found something useful in a Palestinian, but I should find saying
such a thing as that impossible to justify to my conscience. Indeed,
quite to the contrary I'll venture to suggest that no one in the world
will prove to be more scandalized and sickened by this than a majority
of Israelis and Jews themselves. And this in quite the same way any
American of good conscience was shamed right down to his or her
knickers to see those photos that came out of Abu Ghraib, and to hear
the first reports of water-boarding at Gitmo.
That being said, the obvious glee enjoyed by those who come with these
links to this news, only goes to make all the louder their silence
regarding the Chinese body parts market . . .
http://laogai.org/our_work/death-penalty-organ-harvesting
Why should an Israelophobe mention that if it doesn't suit his
agenda? No, not even as it would appear that people are purposely
being executed to provide for the Chinese harvest. At least in Israel
it has involved none of that, seeming to be based rather in a
pragmatical sort of "waste not, want not" kind of ideal?
But while anything so cynical as that would never justify it to anyone
of conscience, it cannot by the same token put the least chill on my
Zionist zeal, any more than the porno from Abu Ghraib and other
obscene tortures from Guantanamo Bay can cause me, like some people to
become a friend to like, all those tens of thousands in Gaza and East
Jerusalem who danced in the street on 9/11. I don't give up on America
because of the stench from our bad eggs, howsoever many or few.
The antisemities and/or those who find a politically correct scapegoat
in Israel and Zionism will have their heyday over this as they shall
think to see in it all the proof they want to proclaim the ancient
Blood Libel for a truth.
It is a black and terrible day for Israel and for Jews all over the
world. And if Bibi doesn't see to it that many a head should roll over
this, he will be out of a job in short order. These lame excuses about
it being old news from ten years ago will not wash.
--
JM http://whosenose.blogspot.com
http://bobbisoxsnatchers.blogspot.com
sheldonlg
I agree with you that anyone who harvested organs without consent should
not only be dismissed, but should be jailed.
Side question: Is there any prospect of change in the position, which I
assume prohibits VOLUNTARY organ donation after death because of
honoring the body, so that transplants can be done with the organs?
Henry Goodman
news:ToqdnXx0oMx8HLLW...@giganews.com...
Why do you assume that? I think you are wrong.
--
Henry Goodman
henry dot goodman at virgin dot net
sheldonlg
Because growing up I was told that the entire body had to be buried. If
an arm was severed, it had to be there as well. I was even told that
tatoos had to be cut off, but I don't know if that is accurate or not.
Also, don't they have to stand guard over the body and aren't autopsies
prohibited except where mandated by secular law?
If I am wrong, it won't be the first time -- but you noticed that I used
the word "assume".
>
Henry Goodman
All you say is correct; I have often functioned as a vacher, standing guard
over the body, and I have been involved in persuading the secular
authorities not to do a post-mortem. However, in some cases organ donation
may be considerd as pikuach nefesh (saving life) which overrides all other
halachot. I think there has recently been legislation on this topic in
Israel but I leave posting details on that to one of our Israeli posters.
sheldonlg
That would be an excellent and admirable ruling. I hope it is so.
Fattush
> [ Moderator's Comment: The link in this post should read
> stinian-organs ]
> In another group we had this terrible link laid on us . . .
>
> >http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/dec/20/israel-admits-harvesting-...
>
> This led one poster to ask isn't such a thing against Torah?
The link was broken. What did it say?
Henry Goodman
--
Henry Goodman
henry dot goodman at virgin dot net
"Fattush" <fatt...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:639d3dbd-c49a-40ba...@r12g2000vbm.googlegroups.com...
______________________________________________________________________________________________
News World news Israel Doctor admits Israeli pathologists harvested organs
without consent Ian Black, Middle East editor The Guardian, Monday 21
December 2009
Israel has admitted pathologists harvested organs from dead Palestinians,
and others, without the consent of their families - a practice it said ended
in the 1990s - it emerged at the weekend.
The admission, by the former head of the country's forensic institute,
followed a furious row prompted by a Swedish newspaper reporting that Israel
was killing Palestinians in order to use their organs - a charge that Israel
denied and called "antisemitic".
The revelation, in a television documentary, is likely to generate anger in
the Arab and Muslim world and reinforce sinister stereotypes of Israel and
its attitude to Palestinians. Iran's state-run Press TV tonight reported the
story, illustrated with photographs of dead or badly injured Palestinians.
Ahmed Tibi, an Israeli Arab MP, said the report incriminated the Israeli
army.
The story emerged in an interview with Dr Yehuda Hiss, former head of the
Abu Kabir forensic institute near Tel Aviv. The interview was conducted in
2000 by an American academic who released it because of the row between
Israel and Sweden over a report in the Stockholm newspaper Aftonbladet.
Channel 2 TV reported that in the 1990s, specialists at Abu Kabir harvested
skin, corneas, heart valves and bones from the bodies of Israeli soldiers,
Israeli citizens, Palestinians and foreign workers, often without permission
from relatives.
The Israeli military confirmed to the programme that the practice took
place, but added: "This activity ended a decade ago and does not happen any
longer."
Hiss said: "We started to harvest corneas ... whatever was done was highly
informal. No permission was asked from the family."
However, there was no evidence that Israel had killed Palestinians to take
their organs, as the Swedish paper reported. Aftonbladet quoted Palestinians
as saying young men from the West Bank and Gaza Strip had been seized by the
Israeli forces and their bodies returned to their families with missing
organs. The interview with Hiss was released by Nancy Scheper-Hughes,
professor of anthropology at the University of California-Berkeley who had
conducted a study of Abu Kabir.
She was quoted by the Associated Press as saying that while Palestinians
were "by a long shot" not the only ones affected, she felt the interview
must be made public, because "the symbolism, you know, of taking skin of the
population considered to be the enemy, [is] something, just in terms of its
symbolic weight, that has to be reconsidered."
Israel demanded that Sweden condemn the Aftonbladet article, calling it an
antisemitic "blood libel". Stockholm refused, saying that to so would
violate freedom of speech in the country. The foreign minister then
cancelled a visit to Israel, just as Sweden was taking over the EU's
rotating presidency.
Hiss was removed from his post in 2004, when some details about organ
harvesting were first reported, but he still works at the forensic
institute.
Israel's health ministry said all harvesting was now done with permission.
"The guidelines at that time were not clear," it said in a statement to
Channel 2. "For the last 10 years, Abu Kabir has been working according to
ethics and Jewish law."
Dennis
"Channel 2 TV reported that in the 1990s, specialists at Abu Kabir
harvested skin, corneas, heart valves and bones from the bodies of Israeli
soldiers, Israeli citizens, Palestinians and foreign workers, often without
permission from relatives."
So it wasn't just anyone, but just about anyone, it sounds like! Of
course, they're singling out Palestinians to make Israel sound bad, but
ordinary Israeli citizens would have reason to object, as would "foreign
workers." Who were the foreign workers?
Dennis
Fattush
> --
> Henry Goodman
> henry dot goodman at virgin dot net
>
>
> news:639d3dbd-c49a-40ba...@r12g2000vbm.googlegroups.com...
> On Dec 21, 5:58 am, Shmendrik <jpd...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > [ Moderator's Comment: The link in this post should read
> >http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/dec/20/israel-admits-harvesting-...
> > stinian-organs ]
> > In another group we had this terrible link laid on us . . .
>
> > >http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/dec/20/israel-admits-harvesting-...
>
> > This led one poster to ask isn't such a thing against Torah?
>
> The link was broken. What did it say?
How horrible! How could they do this?!
I wonder how often it was done . . . .
sheldonlg
With respect to Dr. Hiss, re we sure that it is not a misspelling of his
name?
mm
<tsalagi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Notice the article says this:
>
> "Channel 2 TV reported that in the 1990s, specialists at Abu Kabir
Sounds like a Jewish hospital? No.
>harvested skin, corneas, heart valves and bones from the bodies of Israeli
>soldiers, Israeli citizens, Palestinians and foreign workers, often without
Yeah, this was a few paragraphs donw, but the article starts off "dead
Palestinians and others", no list of the kinds of others at the start,
no numbers of dead, no numbers of how many people die at hat hospital.
>permission from relatives."
Of course I don't approve of this, even if only Arabs did it. But if
the body was intact when they took heart valves, and it might not have
been, that would be a lot worse than taking skin, which the article
makes a big deal out of. AIUI, when skin is removed, one can't even
tell the difference by looking. It's just part of the top layer, not
even the whole epidermis, just a few cells thick. Used for burn
victims, to cover the wound until it heals.
> So it wasn't just anyone, but just about anyone, it sounds like! Of
>course, they're singling out Palestinians to make Israel sound bad, but
Right.
>ordinary Israeli citizens would have reason to object, as would "foreign
>workers." Who were the foreign workers?
>
>Dennis
--
Meir
"The baby's name is Shlomo. He's named after his grandfather, Scott."
Dennis
> On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 03:15:11 +0000 (UTC), Dennis
> <tsalagi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Notice the article says this:
>>
>> "Channel 2 TV reported that in the 1990s, specialists at Abu
>> Kabir
>
> Sounds like a Jewish hospital? No.
Good point. So it could easily have been Arabs who were harvesting
organs improperly and illegally, to many different kinds of people. In
fact - Arabs doing it to Jews!
Israel's spin doctors need to do a better job.
Amitai
> >>"foreign workers." Who were the foreign workers?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Just so people should know what they are talking about.
Abu Kabir is how people refer to Israel's central forensic institute.
It is not a hospital, but the place where homicide and accident
victims are taken and autopsies are carried out to determine cause of
death, time of death, etc ... As victims include Israeli citizens -
both Jewish and Arab, as well as tourists and foreign workers
(Palestinian, Vietnamese, Roumanian, Filipino, Sudanese, etc...),
Abu Kabir processes them all.
It is called Abu Kabir because that is the name of the section of
Metropolitan Tel Aviv-Jaffa in which it is located. Years back it was
a village suburb of Jaffa; hence the Arabic name.
The story about retention of specimens from autopsies and storage at
the institute broke in January 2002. It caused quite a stir and a
thorough investigation. Its recent ressurrection was purely for
propaganda purposes. The organs harvested were used for research
(which does not excuse their having been taken without the families'
knowledge), not for transplantation.
Amitai
mm
Since when does that matter?
>
>Abu Kabir is how people refer to Israel's central forensic institute.
>It is not a hospital, but the place where homicide and accident
That was my mistake first. I see now that Henry's post didn't use the
word hospital.
After I posted my question, I googled Abu Kabir hospital and got no
complete hits, but I did get a wikipedia hit on Abu Kabir. It didnt'
use the word hospital anywhere and it mentioned the forensic
instituted, but I was still stuck on hospital and didn't figure it
out. Thanks for explaining it.
>victims are taken and autopsies are carried out to determine cause of
>death, time of death, etc ... As victims include Israeli citizens -
>both Jewish and Arab, as well as tourists and foreign workers
>(Palestinian, Vietnamese, Roumanian, Filipino, Sudanese, etc...),
>Abu Kabir processes them all.
>
>It is called Abu Kabir because that is the name of the section of
>Metropolitan Tel Aviv-Jaffa in which it is located. Years back it was
>a village suburb of Jaffa; hence the Arabic name.
>
>The story about retention of specimens from autopsies and storage at
>the institute broke in January 2002. It caused quite a stir and a
>thorough investigation. Its recent ressurrection was purely for
>propaganda purposes. The organs harvested were used for research
>(which does not excuse their having been taken without the families'
>knowledge), not for transplantation.
>Amitai
--
sheldonlg
> propaganda purposes. The organs harvested were used for research
> (which does not excuse their having been taken without the families'
> knowledge),
Exactly! Their ultimate use is not significant here.
> not for transplantation.
>
> Amitai
>
mm
But when you were growing up there was no valid purpose for not
burying a severed arm, except exhibition in a medical museum. That's
not a good enough reason. The rest of the body was the same.
Now lives can be saved from donated organs. The law hasn't changed
but the facts have. Different rabbis hold differently on what organs
can be donated when.
> I was even told that
>tatoos had to be cut off, but I don't know if that is accurate or not.
I"m pretty sure it's not. Since I've been in Baltimore 3 guys my age
or younger have told me they were told, one or all by his father, that
if they got a tattoo, they couldn't be buried in a Jewish cemetery.
I'm sure they were told this not because it was true, but so they
wouldnt' get tattoos.
>Also, don't they have to stand guard over the body and aren't autopsies
>prohibited except where mandated by secular law?
If there is someone right there, presumably with the same ailmment,
whose life might be saved by what one learns from an autopsy, then
aiui, it's not only permitted but mandatory. But that situation
happens rarely if ever these days, because there have been loads of
well-done autopises on people with all kinds of ailments, and there is
normally little to be learned by one more autopsy.
OTOH, the definition of right there might be broader in some eyes,
what with telephones, and emailed photographs, and streaming video.
>If I am wrong, it won't be the first time -- but you noticed that I used
>the word "assume".
I presume that's because the topic is Israel, and I too can't
guarantee what the situation is in Israel. But for more about organ
donation, see http://www.hods.org/English/h-issues/videos.asp and
http://www.hods.org/English/h-issues/issues.asp and the
Halachic Organ Donation Society
When I had surgery last January, the hospital wanted me to fill out
forms, and in one I said that if I died -- very unlikely or I would
have been better prepared -- I wanted my body treated in accordance
with www.hods.org . After the surgery, a Jewish social worker in
this Jewish hospital came by with the forms I'd filled out and she had
my forms and said she ddin't know anything about hods.org. And I
purposely hadn't brought my wallet for fear they would lose it. (They
lost my keys when I was there 4 months earlier)
"Brain-Stem Death
Rabbis who object to organ donation do not do so because a body must
be buried whole. They object because organs are usually taken from a
person who is brain-stem dead but whose heart is still beating with
the help of a ventillator. These Rabbis consider a beating heart to be
a sign of life and therefore donating organs at this point would be
killing the donor. The question is whether or not a brain-stem dead
person is alive or dead.
The organ donor card of the Halachic Organ Donor (HOD) Society is
unique because it allows donors to choose to donate their organs at
brain-stem death or after cardiac death.
Many halachic authorities accept brain-stem death as death and support
organ donation even though the heart is still beating. Some of them:"
See url above for the rest.
mm
<NOPSAM...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>I presume that's because the topic is Israel, and I too can't
>guarantee what the situation is in Israel.
Although this is what the hods.org page says: "Brain-Stem Death: This
occurs when the brain-stem is dead, and by implication, the cortex as
well.
The cortex is the big part of the brain on the top and front, and
though it can die without the brain-stem dying, the reverse doesn't
happen.
"According to the laws of the United States and Israel, organs are
only recovered from people who are deceased as defined by brain-stem
death. This means that their brain no longer functions, that they are
unconscious and inanimate.
So it seems Israel law uses the move inclusive standard of brain-stem
death, just as the US does. In practice btw, in the USA and probably
Israel, doctors check with the next of kin, no matter what card the
person carries in his wallet, and maybe no matter what Final
Directions he files with the hospital, and they may say No no matter
what the dead person wanted.
That's why it's good to get your next of kin used to the idea that you
want to donate organs and what your or your rabbi's standard of death
is.
'The brain-stem controls respiration, and therefore the supply of
oxygen to the body. Without oxygen, the heart can continue to beat
only with the aid of a mechanical respirator that pumps blood
throughout the body. The blood carries oxygen, essential to keep
individual organs 'alive' even though the brain-stem is dead.
(Inevitably, even with the use of a ventilator, the heart will shut
down.) Brain-stem death (BSD) is examined in more detail below, from a
medical, halachic and legal standpoint."
Their list of endorsing rabbis includes 4 former chief rabbis of
Israel and one current one, Shlomo Amar, as well as Rabbi Dr. Moshe
Tendler, Rabbi Moshe Feinstein, and a lot of others well known but not
so famous.
It's worth noting that until 50 years ago, people could tell when
someone stopped breathing or his heart stopped, but one couldn't tell
when electrical discharges from his brain stopped. Now all three can
be detected**. And until less than 50 or 100 years ago, if the
brain died and the person wouldn't breathe on his own, he didn't
breathe at all, and very very soon his heart stopped too. There was
no question about who was alive and who was dead. These issues have
come up only in the last 50 years. And there were no organ
transplants either until the same time period.
**Until 1870 we didnt' even have lightbulbs. (Actually, in Eysheshuk
and Grodno it was later than that.)
> But for more about organ
>donation, see http://www.hods.org/English/h-issues/videos.asp and
>http://www.hods.org/English/h-issues/issues.asp and the
>Halachic Organ Donation Society
>
Harry Weiss
Any organ from a dead body can be donated to save a life (that inculdes
cornea transplants) One may also transplant from a living person if the
donor can continue to live well such as a kidney.
One is strictly prohbited from killing someone to harvest organs. The
question of what is dead is where the differences are.
> "Brain-Stem Death
> Meir
--
Harry J. Weiss
hjw...@panix.com
Harry Weiss
> Dennis
Israel has a labor shortage in some manual labor fields and brings in
workers from the far east and eastern europe.