Brisbane, Australia: Chinese Tourists Learn the Truth About Falun Gong

October 28, 2015 | By Minghui correspondent Zhao Lin

(Minghui.org) Falun Gong practitioner Annie lives in Brisbane, the third most populous city in Australia. Annie has gone to King George Square every day over the past several years.

“I have personally benefited from the practice and I would like to share it with more people,” she said. More specifically, Chinese tourists have been misled by the hate propaganda in China and they are very hostile towards Falun Gong practitioners. “These people need to know the real story of Falun Gong,” she said.

2015-10-28-brisbane-1
A tourist listens to a practitioner explaining facts of Falun Gong.

One example is a middle aged woman Annie met October 23. “Why are you always against China?” the woman asked, angrily. “Don’t you want China to be stronger and better?”

Annie explained to her with patience, “I love China, both the long history and its traditional culture; but I do not like the totalitarian regime treating people so badly.” She then briefly reviewed how peaceful Falun Gong practitioners were severely suppressed in China for their belief in Truthfulness-Compassion-Forbearance.

Upon hearing how the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) brutally persecuted practitioners, such as organ harvesting from living people, the woman changed her attitude. In the end, she thanked Annie and agreed to separate herself from the CCP.

More than 30 Chinese tourists agreed to sever ties with the CCP organizations on that day. Among them was a group of seven tourists. They took pictures and accepted information on how to access overseas websites from China by special internet tools.

2015-10-28-brisbane-2
One Chinese tourist agrees to quit the CCP organization.

Chinese version available

Category: Other Community Events

Ningxia Woman’s Ordeal: Forced Labor, Prison Sentence and Torture

October 29, 2015 | By Su Qingling

(Minghui.org) I am Su Qingling, 47, a Falun Gong practitioner. I am a former employee of the Yanghe County Forest Management Station, Yongning County, Ningxia Province.

In my youth, I came down with epilepsy and also was diagnosed with other illnesses. My marriage and work life was very difficult because of my health condition.

However, after I began to practice Falun Gong in 1997, I became healthy, no longer had to take medication, and could do the household chores and my job well. My family was amazed by the effectiveness of Falun Gong and were very supportive.

After the onset of the persecution of Falun Gong in July 1999, I refused to renounce my faith. I was arrested four times, given a three-year forced labor sentence in 2001 and was detained for 42 months after my arrest in 2004. I was tortured while in detention.

My work place fired me upon my release in January 2009, and I was harassed by police during the Chinese Communist regime’s sensitive dates. My husband divorced me two years later, because he feared being implicated.

Three Years of Forced Labor

The police arrested me in September 2000, because they heard that local practitioners planned to go to Beijing to appeal for the right to practice Falun Gong. I was detained for 15 days.

I was arrested again one month later and detained in the Yinchuan City Detention Center. I was forced to work for long hours daily. The police brought my family members to the detention center, a total of 8 people, to persuade me to renounce Falun Gong. I refused and was given three years of forced labor.

After eight months of detention, I was taken to the Yinchuan Women’s Labor Camp on June 27, 2001. The guards tried to make me give up Falun Gong. They took turns talking to me around the clock and deprived me of sleep for a week. Then, my epilepsy relapsed a day after they stopped the torture.

I was released on May 21, 2003, a few months earlier than my term.

Tiger Bench Torture

I was arrested again in April 2004 and detained for 20 days.

Next, I was arrested at work on July 19, 2005. The police ransacked my home. Then, I was taken to the Yinchuan City Detention Center, where I was forced to work about 10 hours daily.

When I asked that my work quota be reduced, I was tortured on the tiger bench for three days and nights. I could only move my head.

torture-2015-10-29
Torture illustration: Tiger bench

My arrest was approved in August and the first hearing was held at the end of 2005 and ended without a verdict.

I went on a hunger strike on February 6, 2006 to protest the intense forced labor. I was again tortured with the tiger bench. I was brutally force fed while on the tiger bench. They inserted the feeding tube through my nose and caused bleeding

The doctor of the detention center released me after three days.

Tortured After Missing Work Quota

I was sentenced to a 42 month prison term during the second hearing on February 26, 2006, and transferred to the Yinchuan Women’s Prison on May 18.

At the prison, I was forced to work long hours and tortured if did not meet my quota.

Practitioners were forced to attend brainwashing sessions. The food we were given was poor and restroom visits were limited.

My brother was not allowed to see me before he left China. My sister was also denied visitation rights, although she had come all the way from Canada.

When I was released on January 18, 2009, I learned that I was fired from my job. I tried to appeal, but without success. County government officials refused to meet with me to discuss the matter.

As a practitioner, it was difficult to find even a temporary job. When I was hired for a janitor job, I was fired after the manager learned that I was a practitioner. However, with the help of several co-workers I was not let go in the end.

Family Implicated and Harassed

My husband used to support my practicing Falun Gong. But after the onset of the persecution, the local police kept harassing me. My husband could not take the stress and pressure. He cooperated with the police to monitor me and then divorced me.

My son became withdrawn socially because of my situation.

One of my older brothers was once detained for three days in the police station in 2000, even though he is not a practitioner. My other brother immigrated to Canada because of the pressure. My other brothers, sister-in-laws and relatives were also affected to some extent, and many did not want to associate with me any longer.

Chinese version available

Category: Accounts of Persecution

BMJ Blog Publishes “China’s Semantic Trick With Prisoner Organs”

October 29, 2015

(Minghui.org) The BMJ (formerly the British Medical Journal), a weekly peer reviewed medical journal, published a blog entry entitled, “China’s semantic trick with prisoner organs” on October 15, 2015, by K. Allison, et al.

The authors stated, “Since 2006, mounting evidence suggests that prisoners of conscience are killed for their organs in China with the brutally persecuted Buddhist practice, Falun Gong, among others, being the primary target. This issue has increasingly captured the attention of public media (e.g. BBC radio report and recent SBS and CBC television reports) and the political sphere (e.g. the European Parliament resolution ‘Organ harvesting in China’ of 12 December 2013 and the like named European Parliament workshop on 21 April 2015).”

Under pressure from the international community, China transplant officials admitted to harvesting organs from death-row prisoners years ago, to shift attention to its practice of forced organ harvesting from prisoners of conscience. But the World Medical Association (WMA) states unmistakably in its policy that “in jurisdictions where the death penalty is practised, executed prisoners must not be considered as organ and/or tissue donors.”

To avoid continued external criticism, “On 3 December 2014, the director of the China Organ Donation Committee and former vice-minister of health, Huang Jiefu, announced that China would cease using death-row prisoners’ organs for transplantation after January 2015. Since then, many medical professionals and international journalists have believed that China has stopped using executed prisoners as a source of organs. This, however, is a misjudgement of the situation in China.”

The authors pointed out that, “The term ‘death-row prisoners’ organs’ to which Huang referred is different from the common definition of prisoner organs. The announcement by Huang refers to the intention to stop the use of organs illegally harvested without the consent of the prisoners. If ‘consent’ is obtained, organ procurement from executed prisoners is legal according to current Chinese laws.

“These prisoner organs procured with ‘consent’ are now classified as voluntary donations from citizens. The re-defining of prisoners as regular citizens in this context is facilitated by the fact that there is currently no law in China that distinguishes prisoners from regular citizens for organ sourcing.

“However the use of ‘voluntarily donated’ prisoner organs in China continues to violate international ethical guidelines. It is a fundamental principle in transplant medicine that organ donations must be made voluntarily, which in turn requires autonomous, informed decision making. Even with ‘consent,’ using organs from prisoners is not acceptable: prisoners are neither free from coercion nor always fully informed, nor able to freely consent, nor are their families.

“Such organs are still being used for transplantation, but are no longer considered as prisoner organs in China:

China Daily reported on 4 December 2014: ‘Prisoners are still among the qualified candidates for donations, but their organs will be registered in the computerised system instead of being used for private trades, which will be the main difference in the future, Huang told reporters.’

People’s Daily reported on January 28, 2015: ‘According to Huang Jiefu, death-row prisoners are also citizens. The law does not deprive them of the right to donate organs. If death-row prisoners are willing to atone for their crime by donating organs, they should be encouraged.’

“All these statements collectively deliver a clear message: death-row prisoners are still allowed or perhaps even encouraged to ‘voluntarily’ supply organs in China. These organs are now classified as voluntary donations from citizens.”

Apparently, China plays a semantic trick on the issue. Prisoner organs are continuously harvested under a different saying to avoid condemnation. “China’s semantic trick with prisoner organs works very ‘successfully’ and has already begun to bear fruit.”

The authors noted, “Still, there is currently great confusion in the international community regarding this issue due to a lack of transparency in China. For example, at the European Parliament workshop on ‘organ harvesting in China’ on 21 April 2015, the former president of the Transplant Society (TTS), Francis Delmonico, erroneously stated that ‘organ procurement from executed prisoners has been illegal since 1 January 2015, by the law of China.’ Very recently, Jeremy R Chapman, editor-in-chief of the journal Transplantation, stated in a commentary in the July issue that ‘the use of organs from executed prisoners is now, by government mandate, illegal.’ These interpretations are in clear contrast to the aforementioned statements of Chinese transplant officials who in 2015 continue to openly defend prisoner organ ‘donation.’”

Furthermore, the authors found, “The announcement of December 2014 itself is neither a law nor a governmental regulation. It is only at best a statement of good intentions but has no force of law. The announcement is not even mentioned in the policies of the PRC National Health and Family Planning Commission, which administers the China Organ Transplant Response System (COTRS). And to underline the legal uncertainty, the 1984 Regulation that permits the use of executed prisoners’ organs has not been abolished.”

The authors pointed out, “After repeated past unfulfilled promises from China, such as the Chinese Medical Association letter to the WMA in 2007, and the failed Hangzhou Resolution in 2013, announcements alone, without subsequent legal actions and without verification that those respective laws are implemented, should not be regarded as satisfactory by the medical community.

“If this semantic trick (labelling prisoner organs as voluntary donations from citizens) is accepted by the international medical community, China would officially bypass international ethical guidelines, and the unethical practice of organ harvesting from prisoners may become a never-ending story.”

They continued, “Moreover, the new ‘standard’ may foster the increase of forced organ harvesting from prisoners of conscience as well.”

“By re-defining prisoners as regular citizens for ‘voluntary’ organ donation, China’s national organ procurement system may be abused to whitewash organ sourcing from both death-row prisoners and prisoners of conscience.”

They concluded, “Therefore, by reason of international ethical standards and vulnerable populations at risk of abuse, the use of organs from any kind of prisoners must be prohibited by law in China. China must make its organ donation system transparent and verifiable to independent professional organizations and open to international inspections to gain credibility. Until then, sanctions should remain.”

Chinese version available

Category: Organ Harvesting