Jonathan Cook had a great piece in The National yesterday, in which he pulled together from exemplary Israeli sources the history of serious problems at Israel’s government institute of forensics at Abu Kabir, near Jaffa.
He made the important point that the Swedish journo Donald Bostrom who wrote about the accusations and fears of illegal Israeli harvesting of Palestinian organs was making an unwarranted connection between the recent story of Jewish residents, including some apparent community leaders, in New Jersey, USA, being indicted on charges of organ trafficking and the much longer-running and very well established problems Palestinians and Israelis have experienced with organs being “harvested” (ugh!) without permission by officials at the Abu Kabir institute.
As far as I can tell, no connection between the two situations has yet been discovered. And the Palestinian claims about organ harvesting at Abu Kabir that Bostrom was writing about all related to the early 1990s; they were not current accusations.
Cook writes,
- the doctor behind the plunder of body parts, Prof Yehuda Hiss, appointed director of the Abu Kabir institute in the late 1980s, has never been jailed despite admitting to the organ theft and he continues to be the state’s chief pathologist at the institute.
Hiss was in charge of the autopsies of Palestinians when Bostrom was listening to the families’ claims in 1992. Hiss was subsequently investigated twice, in 2002 and 2005, over the theft of body parts on a large scale.
Allegations of Hiss’ illegal trade in organs was first revealed in 2000 by investigative reporters at the Yediot Aharonot newspaper, which reported that he had “price listings” for body parts and that he sold mainly to Israeli universities and medical schools. [6]
Cook used excellent sources, which are given at the foot of the article.
Despite that, and despite his history as a former reporter for the Guardian, the Guardian refused to publish this article in its “CommentisFree” section. Jonathan also gives us his record of his subsequent communications with CiF editor Georgina Henry.
Meanwhile, the Zurich-based Israeli investigative reporter Shraga Elam has also recently put a LOT of further information about Israel’s organ-removal problems into this post on his blog.
The post, which is now available in English, is tellingly titled The Swedish canard – not only smoke, but also fire.
It tells us that the government investigation committee that looked into allegations of wrongdoing at Abu Kabir in 2001 or 2002, made the following findings:
- * The Institute harvests organs for the purposes of teaching and research, without the consent of the families, in contravention of the Law of Anatomy and Pathology, and on the basis of incorrect self-interpretation.
* The Institute transfers organs to research institutes and universities, in return for payments and reimbursement of expenses.
* The Institute does not have full documentation regarding the organs that were harvested from for the purposes of research and instruction.
* All the research done at the Institute were done with the full knowledge and agreement of Prof. Hiss.
* Prof. Hiss did not conform to the instructions of the Ministry of Health regarding research, instruction and the consent of the families. The management of the Institute attempted to cover up and to obscure the the seriousness of the acts that appear in the report.
* Irregularities were discovered in registration of the money that was given to the Institute in return to for the salvaging of the organs…
Elam also quotes a fairly lengthy article from Haaretz, published in 2005, that said this:
- The Breaking the Silence organization has collected new testimony from Israel Defense Forces soldiers on harsh actions carried out during the course of the fighting in the territories.
Two of the testimonies pertain to a military doctor who gave medics lessons in anatomy using the bodies of Palestinians killed by Israeli forces.
IDf sources said on Thursday that the army was unaware of the incidents and that the reports would be investigated.
An IDF conscript who served as a medic in the Ramallah district some two years ago told Haaretz that the “lesson” had taken place following a clash between an armed Palestinian and an IDF force.
The soldier said that the Palestinian’s body had been riddled with bullets and that some of his internal organs had spilled out. The doctor pronounced the man dead and then “took out a knife and began to cut off parts of the body,” the soldier said.
“He explained the various parts to us – the membrane that covers the lungs, the layers of the skin, the liver, stuff like that,” the soldier continued.
“I didn’t say anything because I was still new in the army. Two of the medics moved away, and one of them threw up. It was all done very brutally. It was simply contempt for the body. I saw other dead enemy bodies during my service. No other doctor did anything like that.”
It is clear that there is a lot more to this story than meets the eye.
Until someone actually DOES make a connection between all these stories, it all amounts to yellow journalism at best and (I must agree with our Zionist opponents) borderline antisemitism at worst. What is wrong with either (1) doing some original research; (2) waiting until someone else does; or (3) refraining from speculating upon things that have no known connections?
I haven’t speculated on anything. I have paid heed to the collection of sources that Jonathan Cook and Shraga Elam have compiled. Elam, in particular, has published materials that have not previously been available in English. Most of his sources– and his original post on the Hebrew-language site ‘The Marker’– were in Hebrew. In the blog posting to which I link, the earlier ‘Marker’ material was translated into English by George Malent. Malent and Shraga have thereby done a real service to the world of English speakers who do not, alas, also read Herbrew.
There is nothing low enough that Helena can’t endorse. I was waiting what took Helena so long to throw some mud on the canard of the IDF harvesting organs. The only remaining between Helena and Ahmadinejad remaining is Holocaust denial. We are waiting Helena for you to tackle that one also.
Any pretense of journalism or informative angle is gone. Helena you are a disgusting poor soul. It must be hard to be driven by such a bitter hatred, unless you are getting paid.
It is nice to see that Titus is keeping firm in his decision to ignore all facts that he doesn’t like, and continuing to yell antisemitism at any article that fails to praise everything Israeli.
You’re a real brain surgeon, Titus. When you can’t effectively argue, just insinuate Helena is a Holocaust denier, compare her to I’m-a-dinner-jacket. You guys must really be getting desperate. Perhaps the opprobrium, divestment activities of civilized countries like Norway is getting to you. It must be hard to deal with the fact more and more Americans are waking up to Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians.
This is not an anti-semitic story. It is an inevitable story. The situation of Israel makes such things unavoidable, and on a continuous basis. It is not the case that the bad things happened in the 1940s “but that was then and this is now”. The stuff will and must go on, it can’t stop.
The hellish thing about colonialism is that there is no way to get clean, unless you give it all up.
In this case the Israelis are relying on their undiscriminating bully-boy shock-troops, like Titus, but too much of the truth is already out. The only thing to do with truth is to accept it, and this is what they are going to have to do.
That will constitute a small step on the road to admitting the whole colonial mess the Israelis are in, which in general is no different from the mess that others have been in before them.
Jonathan Cook and Shraga Elam are impeccable journalists. The practices described in the organ-harvesting stories (with cautionary comments by Helena), are quite in keeping with Israel’s decades-long contempt for the rule of law; decades-long loathing and oppression of the populations they have occupied since 1967, not to mention the 3/4 million expelled in 1948. The organ-harvesting also fits right in with the giant “experiment” constituted by the invasion of Gaza with its use of white phosphorous, DIME, and more “conventional” sophisticated weaponry on the first population to be attacked in a cage from which escape was impossible.
Paul Woodward recently wrote a piece on the related subject of “transplant tourism” and the illegal buying and selling of organs (which is the real story connecting the NJ arrests with Israel) which makes clear that Israeli medical professionals are major violators of international norms and laws governing the donation of organs for transplant and that they do so in an atmosphere that is so permissive that it amounts to immunity. The article can be found here:
http://warincontext.org/2009/08/25/israel-doth-protest-too-much/
For me this all poses a much bigger question that I hope some of Israel’s erstwhile supporters who spend so much time stirring the pot here may be able to answer. This is a genuine inquiry and I hope it will be treated as such.
We hear a great deal from both official Israel and its supporters that the country is an oasis of freedom, democracy and decency in a region they often depict as being largely barbaric, backward and, really, “not like us”. And yet, time and again we see evidence – and the subject of this thread is just the latest example – that when it comes to the international laws, norms, agreements and standards of the rest of the “club” to which it claims membership, Israel shows a flagrant disregard for the “rules” of membership.
Why? And what has led successive Israeli governments and the people who have elected them to believe they have the right to live in this way; separate and exceptional? Why do you think you don’t have any legal or moral obligation to behave, at least responsibly, in these matters?
And I don’t want to hear how bad Hamas is!
I have just deleted six comments above that all violated the guidelines on civil and constructive discourse, especially by going off-topic and failing to be courteous.
The topic of this post is not me. It is the evidence presented by Cook and Elam. I ask commenters to comment directly on that.
Leaving aside ‘blood-libel’ issues such as organ harvesting for transplant, a summary of Israeli atrocities leads to an inescapable conclusion.
1) IDF shoots unarmed Palestinians w/o provocation.,
2) IDF peppered Southern Lebanon with cluster bombs during its retreat.
3) Israel used white phosphorus against civilians in Gaza.
4) Israel uses checkpoints and the wall to prevent Palestinians from receiving medical care.
5) Israel steals Palestinian water.
6) Israel has shot/bulldozed unarmed protesters.
7) Israel has used provocation to subvert peace talks.
8) Israel has an organized program to expand by stealing land from Palestinians.
9)Israel was founded on the massacre of Palestinian villages.
The list goes on. Israel shows it is incapable of recognizing Palestinians as humans. Why is it such a mental stretch to accuse Israel of an organized abuse of Palestinians, alive or dead, that involves organ theft?
Why? Because *that* would set off an international firestorm and completely destroy Israel’s pseudo-right “to defend itself.” Nations that take prisoners for the purpose of harvesting organs forfeit the right to defend themselves.
“Why is it such a mental stretch to accuse Israel of an organized abuse of Palestinians, alive or dead, that involves organ theft?”
It is not that it is a mental stretch, it is that there is no evidence for an organized abuse of Palestinians that involves organ theft. On the other hand, we have abundant evidence amounting to absolute proof for the abuses you listed. See the difference? Let’s have an actual investigation by a third party not aligned with either side. Let’s have examinations by forensic pathologists that either confirms or does not confirm that organs have been removed from Palestinians’ bodies. Then let’s have an investigation that determines the chain of custody of those bodies, and what happened to them at every step along the chain. If that produces actual evidence of an organized abuse of Palestinians that involves organ theft, then we have some basis for discussing it as something real. Up to now we don’t have that, and without that I, for one, am not going to discuss this story as if it were fact.
” I have just deleted six comments above ……., especially by going off-topic and failing to be courteous. The topic of this post is not me.”
Ms. Cobban must not have read Titus’s personalized views and
quoted below or does not consider them as off-topic.
“There is nothing low enough that Helena can’t endorse. I was waiting what took Helena so long to throw some mud on the canard of the IDF harvesting organs. The only remaining between Helena and Ahmadinejad remaining is Holocaust denial. We are waiting Helena for you to tackle that one also.
Any pretense of journalism or informative angle is gone. Helena you are a disgusting poor soul. It must be hard to be driven by such a bitter hatred, unless you are getting paid.”.
Posted by Titus at September 5, 2009 11:29 PM
“It is not that it is a mental stretch, it is that there is no evidence for an organized abuse of Palestinians that involves organ theft. On the other hand, we have abundant evidence amounting to absolute proof for the abuses you listed. See the difference?”
Yes, the difference is that one set of abuses have been proven and the other set has not. However, because both sets share the characteristic of plausibility, it is imperative that we (i.e. non-atrocity approving peoples of the planet) be allowed to investigate the allegations which means being allowed to discuss them. Else, whatever atrocities are committed may continue without opposition.
In simpler words, the Israeli defense that the “blood-libel is so unspeakable that it should not be considered” is itself so unspeakable that it should be summarily dismissed.
The state is the executive committee of the ruling class. The state is organised because there is no other occasion or structure wherein the ruling class can act as one. But this does not mean that the ruling class does not act at all, other than in the form of the state. On the contrary, the vast majority of ruling-class activity is conducted outside of the state, in terms of the general freedom granted to the ruling class by the state to so act.
The defence that Shirin offers to her opponents shows that Shirin will always defend the bourgeoisie in general before opposing any part of it. Shirin’s argument is a near-perfect demonstration of the way that the state is constructed in the bourgeois mind. The perpetrating bourgeoisie is to be exonerated on the grounds that the act was the act of one bourgeois individual, even though such individual bourgeois acts are what the state licences, and exists to licence. In the bourgeois mind, the existence of the bourgeois state invariably provides two excuses for every occasion: 1. The State did it; or 2. An individual did it.
Shirin’s support of the Palestinian cause is secondary to her support of the bourgeois cause, and this is why Jamesspeaks argument that “Nations that take prisoners for the purpose of harvesting organs forfeit the right to defend themselves” fails.
Jamesspeaks fails to reckon with the bourgeois consciousness that is inseparable from the “international” public opinion that he thinks could create a “firestorm” over this and “destroy” some “right” of Israel.
In other words, Jamesspeaks uses the same bourgeois logic of the state, but now at international level, to imagine total regulation of the legitimacy or otherwise of Israel. But “international” public opinion, as given, which is in fact bourgeois opinion, will in practice attenuate its response in exactly the manner exampled here by Shirin.
What has to be done is to create a critique that is free of such overwhelming bourgeois “defaults”. The creation of such a critique is the “problematique” of the anti-war blogosphere. Such a problematisation explains why this blogosphere constantly fails, and constantly has to try again. The failure of this blogosphere to construct a winning critique is not due to the strength of its opponents, but due to its own intrinsic contradictions.
Dominic, did no one ever teach you that it is the height of rudeness to talk about someone in the third person when they are in the room and part of the conversation?
Interesting. Domza uses the language of philosophy. Correct Philosophy seems to change every thirty years. I wondered “How can something so right thirty years ago be so wrong now?” Over and over.
To answer your question directly, Shirin: No. This is the manner of polemic. It is more than normal and acceptable; it is the preferred method. One of the reasons that the polemical manner is preferred is because it is essentially respectful. It is most literally “polite”. I am sorry if you take offense, but I am sure you are mistaken to do so. I am sure because I am am in daily contact with polemic.
Jamesspeaks, it is not the case that philosophy changes every thirty years. The fundamental question of philosophy remains the same as it always was: The relation of the human to the material world. Thank you for the opportunity to say that.
But in fact I was not being any more philosophical than you, or anyone else. Everybody proceeds form some world-view or other. Of course, I was being political in the first place. Perhaps you would rather people did not notice the politics? I was afraid so.
If we at JWN are to construct a critique that would be as powerful as you imagine, i.e. one that could, in your words, “set off an international firestorm and completely destroy Israel’s pseudo-right ‘to defend itself,'” then it will have to be a class-conscious critique.
I am not saying that it must be solely or exclusively proletarian; I am saying that class realities must be brought to the surface, so that both bourgeois and proletarians can participate with their eyes open, on the basis of a minimum programme that recognises both, and takes neither for granted.
The “public opinion” that is class-blind is bourgeois public opinion, and bourgeois public opinion alone is inadequate for this task, as we have seen.
Domza, if you are trying to say we need a message that everyone “gets” then that message is “Israel is suspected of harvesting organs from Palestinians.”
There is nothing I can think of, though using white phosphorus comes close, that would do to the State of Israel the same as Israel does to unarmed civilians when it deploys phosphorus bombs, as effectively as providing legitimacy to accusations of a program of organ trafficking.
This accusation cuts through class lines, it negates the Holocaust card, it stains the Judeo right out of Judeo-Christian ethics, and it makes Bennie Netanyahoo roll over in his grave (we should be so lucky).
It is the Holy Grail of the Palestinian cause. (An unfortunate metaphor, but you see, I’m steeped in them.)
What better rallying cry for a one state solution? “But, but, but that would destroy Israel’s unique character,” they would say. “And high time for that,” we would reply, “Unless you think organ trafficking is a good thing.”
Well, I’ll tell you what then, Dominic, I respectfully request that you leave me out of your “polemic” unless you are willing to address me directly. I do not appreciate when I am present in the room being spoken about as if I were not.
Why send a message that everyone has got, James? No, the construction of an alliance is a piece of work to be done, which cannot assume some a priori consensus, or latent consensus.
You think that the horror of atrocities “cuts through class lines”? Not at all. Not when the hands of the bourgeoisie are still dripping with fresh blood.
The pre-requisite for the kind of general acceptance of an argument such as you propose is that it becomes divorced from the “muck of ages”. The only way to do that is to make the class realities explicit.
I think that this particular message cuts through all divisions, class and otherwise. Another one playing out here in the states is “death panels.”
Some messages resonate. When you find one that does, and it suits your cause, and it is actually true (not proven yet), then use it. Also, try to avoid using words like bourgeswazee and the other stuff. They’r real buzz kills.
Do you want to neuter the Likudniks or not? Which is more important, winning a one state solution for Palestine, or adhering to your stale language?
James, I am telling you that you are not going to be able to use the bourgeois media against the interests of the bourgeoisie. The existence of a separate “blogosphere”, on the other hand, suggests the possibility of developing a critique beyond the editorial reach of the usual suspects. But in practice, the blogniks import with them the disabilities that they needed to leave behind. One of those disabilities is the kind of liberalism that believes it is possession of universal human moral values.
Is there a list somewhere (albeit a short one) of the kinds of things we are allowed to question Israel about without automatically being accused of antisemitism?
Dozma,
It is not a human value to not want to be eaten by a crocodile, nor is it a human value to not want to be imprisoned, have your liver auctioned off, then be murdered for it.
It is a universal aversion to being someone else’s meat.
Good night.
and then there is the consideration that the organs in question are part of an internatinal trade in commodities. The internal organs of the executed (in China) and, prima facie evidence would suggest, in Occupied Palestine are traded in the marketplace.
As Rosa Luxemburg noted the alternative to socialism, is barbarism: a world in which everything and everyone is at the disposal of those owning the means of production.
Bevin, with respect, what “prima facie evidence”? So far I have not seen a single jot of actual evidence. We don’t even have evidence that organs were removed from bodies (except in the case of Abu Kabir, in which Palestinian bodies were included, but Palestinians were not targeted). All we have right now are questions and a lot of speculation. Let’s have an independent investigation, and if that investigation turns up some actual evidence, then we will have something real to talk about.
Shirin, based on the sources used by Jonathan Cook and Shraga Elam, I think we certainly now have a lot of prima facie evidence of grave irregularities that need investigating, yes, but also as a way of getting that to happen in a proper, accountable way, to be discussed by journalists and researchers.
The materials available through the “War in Context” link that Steve provided are also extemely strong and persuasive. The 2001 congressional testimony that Paul Woodward links to (and uses some of) there, by Prof. Scheper-Hughes, is particularly important. (Scroll down to p.62, where her whole submission is included in that record.)
It is true, as you write, that the reported violations perpetrated by Dr. Hiss seem to have targeted not only Palestinians, but also Israelis. But how many “freshly killed” Israeli bodies could he potentially get his hands on, compared with “freshly killed” Palestinians? Also, as Jonathan Cook points out, When Palestinian demands for justice are not backed by investigations from journalists or the protests of the international community, Israel can safely ignore them. That is because Palestinians are so devoid of any power inside the Israeli system. I imagine the relatives of Israeli soldiers whose bodies were defiled by him can mostly speak up for themselves.
Hi all,
I just wanted to draw your attention to some passages out of my blog that Helena quoted:
“there is no doubt that the Swedish journalist did not work in a serious way and his newspaper did not exhibit the professionalism and the sensitivity required for such a problematical subject. There can be no educated European who does not know of the blood-libel and the various conspiracy theories against Jews. It is therefore necessary to strictly adhere to the precautionary principle and not to present a jumble of facts and half-truths that are not clearly and/or necessarily linked to each other.
Behind the purely associative link made between the a network of Israeli organ merchants that was exposed recently and the fact that in 1992 bodies of Palestinians were returned with organs missing is the profound conviction that all Jews are strongly linked by bonds of mutual solidarity. Such linkage made up in the feverish brain of the Swedish journalist should at most have been the starting point for research; certainly they were not sufficient basis for a published article. Any serious editor would have sent him back to do his homework.
Having said all that, it is impossible to ignore the fact that at the root of the story there is definitely a serious problem, and it is no coincidence that the former Israeli ambassador to Germany, Avi Primor, speaking on the current events TV show “London and Kirschenbaum” on Sunday [23 August 2009], called for an investigation into the subject.
There is ample evidence that trade in organs has been done in Israel, at least for the purposes of research and teaching…. read more here: http://shraga-elam.blogspot.com/2009/09/swedish-canard-not-only-smoke-but-also.html. ”
For me there is no doubt that on the one hand the Swedish journalist gave the “Anti-Semitism Industry” a present with his sloppy article On the other hand as I proved in my piece there is an urgent need for a reliable comprehensive investigation into the case.
this story has really shown who the palestinians friends are !
THE Guardian has refused to publish Cooks article in its Comment is Free.
this story has really shown who the palestinians friends are !
THE Guardian has refused to publish Cooks article in its Comment is Free.
no shrahga…there is nothing wrong with Bostroms article. its not racist nor is it sloppy journalism. The zionist jews have been pandered to for so long, they expecyt everyone to ignore the palestine story. Before Bostrom, who had even heard of this atrocity?He has breached a hole int the wall.
Great work, Donald!
Steve Connors,
“For me this all poses a much bigger question that I hope some of Israel’s erstwhile supporters who spend so much time stirring the pot here may be able to answer. This is a genuine inquiry and I hope it will be treated as such.”
Like all of Israel’s supporters I hope that it isn’t true, that it’s baseless. I am of course going to me more skeptical because there is a history of outrageous claims made against Israel. Remember the Dutch peace keepers who claimed to see Israeli soldiers throw hand granades on Palestinian bodies. Or the claims that Palestinians killed in Lebanon were being buried in mass graves until Israel showed they were being buried in Israel according to International law. Or the Israeli gas attack in the West Bank that sent tens of thousands of Palestinian school girls to hospitals. Or remember, well you get the point and I haven’t even finished with the 80s.
Yes, Israel claims to be moral, and abide by the rule of law but they do not claim that there isn’t a single Jew who isn’t just as susceptible to corrupting greed than individuals in any other group.
That said lets suppose it’s true. Two possibilities exist. Either it is being done with the stamp of approval of the government or it isn’t. And for that we’ll just have to wait and see. However I doubt that the answer will ever be definitive enough for everyone.
Either way benalbanach asks what are we allowed to question “without automatically being accused of antisemitism”?
If it wasn’t Israel but somewhere in the US, England, France or Germany would we then claim that the US, France or Germany didn’t have a right to exist as some of the other commenters suggest?
One last statement, you stated you don’t want to hear how bad Hamas is. OK, but I will ask, Is this really impossible to imagine happening in an Arab and/or Muslim country?
Oh goody! After wearing out his welcome on Richard Silverstein’s blog, setting a world record for most comments posted in a single threat in less than eight hours, Brian has come over to spam this blog and put us all in our place.
hello shirin, i see youve migrated here to carry water for israel. At least Helen has bothered to post on this issue…Richard decided he prefered to defend the IOF.
‘Yes, Israel claims to be moral, and abide by the rule of law ‘
THis is what comes from indulging a spoiled child…Israel is about as moral as dracula.Its because their behaviour is so IMMoral that the story of organ theft by IOF is plausible.
Brian, I have not “migrated” here. I am one of the original regular commenters on this blog. And as anyone here knows, and as you would know if you bothered to read anything I have written ever, I have never “carried water” for Israel. But, please, don’t let reality get in your way ever.
‘ have written ever, I have never “carried water” for Israel. ‘
then prove it by signing this petition for an investigation:
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/investigateorgantheft/
And dont forget, but for Bostrom, we’d not even be having this debate.
I don’t have to prove anything to you, Brian. None of us does.
Instead of taking the easy way out with some useless internet petition, why don’t you put your body where you mouth is, and actually do something useful for the Palestinians? Go to Bil`in, go help with the olive harvest, join ISM, or the Christian Peacemakers, or help ICAHD rebuild a house. Or go volunteer in an orphanage or a hospital in Gaza.
as i thought…you wont sign the petition…so youre not really concerned for the palestinians or any investigation into the organ theft claims.
Thanks for clarifying that.
With all my posts on this topic removed by Helena, I feel like she is removing my organs.
I pointed to the Ramallah incident when Palestinian removed by hand the organs of two IDF drivers that made the worng turn, and posted links to that famous case.
How can that be off topic.
Helena you are a biased coward, and that is my opinion, using the same freedom of expression the Swedish did.
Deal with my words, do not remove stuff in cowardice, it is only words, stop hiding behind blog guidelines you sad and compromised soul.
Happy labor day, I drove up and down the coast of this beautiful country with its generous people that welcomes even stains like HC.
palestinians remove organs by hand? Did they wash their hands first?>
Try to stick to the truth, Titus. If thats your way of defending zionism from Bostroms investigations, then you only confirm them.
finally titus, you may feel safe dricing upo and down the US, but if a palestinian tried that in israel, or an iraqi in iraq, theyd be shot and autopsied!
Thank you for your thoughts David.
I haven’t seen anyone truly question Israel’s “right to exist” over this, only that it carries out its obligations under international law and does not hold itself and its citizens exceptional to such standards of behavior. I don’t know of another country that would have tried to stare this down in the way that has happened and most of of the countries you mention would have launched a very serious inquiry into the allegations being made. There’s an arrogance to the sense of immunity that many find very distasteful.
It seems that in the broader context of buying organs, a part of the problem in Israel has been a shortage of legitimately available organs for transplant caused by conservative religious values and judgments holding sway in the country – even though a great many citizens refuse to accept their application. Similar attitudes probably also exist in the case of Hamas’ in Gaza and throughout most countries in the Middle East. It’s worth bearing in mind that being and remaining a Muslim, in most Islamic countries, is not an option; there’s not really a viable secular direction for the individual. For those reasons I think the situation in Israel is less likely to be extant among either the Palestinian’s or the broader Middle Eastern populations because the laws against it are more likely to be enforced.
You ever heard of projection, Titus? You talk about a verbal lynch mob at this site and you being the victim of it, and then you throw out personal attacks like “coward” and call Helena a “stain” (what an incredibly de-humanizing expression, what do we do with stains, we ‘get rid of them’, is that what you want?). You are the one addicted to the ad hominen like some crazed meth-head. I think it speaks for her tolerance that you are even allowed to comment here at all given your hateful personal attacks, particularly since that’s all your regular comments amount to.
‘I haven’t seen anyone truly question Israel’s “right to exist” over this, only that it carries out its obligations under international law ‘
What gives israel the right to exist? Since it has no legal basis, and was founded on terrorism and theft. Steve, are you forgetting Israel only exists by taking over palestinian land? You need to ask why you and others deny the right of palestine to exist…
For those not up to speed:
‘Turkey’s Fallout With Israel Deals Blow to Settlers
Ottoman archives show land deeds forged
by Jonathan Cook
A legal battle being waged by Palestinian families to stop the takeover of their neighborhood in East Jerusalem by Jewish settlers has received a major fillip from the recent souring of relations between Israel and Turkey.
After the Israeli army’s assault on the Gaza Strip in January, lawyers for the families were given access to Ottoman land registry archives in Ankara for the first time, providing what they say is proof that title deeds produced by the settlers are forged.
On Monday, Palestinian lawyers presented the Ottoman documents to an Israeli court, which is expected to assess their validity over the next few weeks. The lawyers hope that proceedings to evict about 500 residents from Sheikh Jarrah will be halted.
The families’ unprecedented access to the Turkish archives may mark a watershed, paving the way for successful appeals by other Palestinians in East Jerusalem and the West Bank caught in legal disputes with settlers and the Israeli government over land ownership.’
etc
http://www.antiwar.com/cook/
I want to give an especially warm welcome to Shraga Elam for coming and joining the discussion here. Shraga, I think your blog post made some very important arguments, as well as introducing us to material hitherto unavailable in English.
Big thanks!
Meanwhile, Brian, can you calm down, take a few deep breaths, re-read the commenter’s guidelines (especially on discourse-hogging), and stop throwing around baseless and irrelevant accusations, etc, so we can have an adult discussion here?
Titus, what the people of Ramallah did to the two Israelis on that occasion was indefensible. But there is no evidence at all that Palestinians “removed their organs by hand”. You’re just lobbing incendiary and unsubstantiated acusations into this discussion (also, with your mean-spirited and childish name-calling), in an attempt to distract attention.
sorry helena, but i speak my mind. And to my mind all to man people are demonising Bostrom. The palestinians support him completely and unlike Elam, do not regard him as a racist or his article as bad journalism.
It may be your blog, but its my mind.
“The palestinians support him completely”
What is your basis for this claim, Brian?