首页  >  凯风专区  >  热文
中国“焚尸炉”揭秘(中英对照)

作者:格兰·麦克格雷格 · 2007-12-05 来源:凯风网
  【加拿大《渥太华公民报》2007年11月24日,作者:格兰·麦克格雷格】成为法轮功组织成员是违法的。据说苏家屯医院非常恐怖,人们认为苏家屯的医疗设备遭到了极端滥用,因为它的医生将2000多名法轮功信徒的器官摘走,然后焚尸灭迹。但是,在采访了这家医院之后,格兰·麦克格雷格却对上述道听途说的“暴行”产生了怀疑。
 
  中国沈阳。上个月一个阳光明媚的早上,两名穿着蓝色制服的工人把手推车里的煤往锅炉里面填,这个锅炉室负责向辽宁省血栓病医院供暖。锅炉室里,工人们用铁铲把煤送到坡道上,以便炉子里的火烧得更旺。
 
  四年前,某些人认为医院里的这些锅炉拥有险恶的用途——用来焚烧法轮功练习者的尸体。
 
  位于中国东北沈阳市的苏家屯医院,被认为是“死亡集中营”,据称数以千计的法轮功学员在那里被杀害,并且器官被盗。
 
  据称,在苏家屯,罪犯活着时被摘取眼角膜,然后用于器官移植。2000多名法轮功学员在苏家屯被害,尸体当场焚烧,致使炉子里塞满了尸体而不是煤。
 
  如果上述的所谓“据称”都是真的,那么苏家屯将面临强迫摘取活体器官、侵犯人权的指控。
 
  很多人都说不要靠近特雷布林卡或奥斯维辛的那些死亡用具,苏家屯的上述所谓罪行自然会引起人们对纳粹暴行的联想。
 
  然而,至今也不清楚在苏家屯或是其他什么地方是否真的发生过对法轮功学员的大屠杀或是强迫性的器官摘取等事情。
 
  随着2008年北京奥运会日益临近,中国承受着国际媒体越来越多的关注,也是越来越严峻的考验。中国政府和法轮功各执一词的争辩也越来越白热化。
 
  尽管关于中国处决法轮功学员以及强迫摘取器官等事件的指控在不断增加,但是,并没有任何组织出面证实过这些指控的真实性。
 
  然而,有两个加拿大人,前议员大卫·基尔格和来自温伯尼湖的律师大卫·麦塔斯却支持针对中国政府的上述指控。他们在2006年出版的《关于中共活取法轮功学员器官调查报告》(今年又进行了修订)认为,法轮功学员因为中共要强摘他们的器官而被杀害。
 
  自基尔格·麦塔斯报告出炉以来,麦塔斯先生开始全球巡回宣扬他们的观点,谴责中共活取法轮功学员器官,谴责中国虐待法轮功。西方记者就例行公事地将基尔格·麦塔斯的发现当作事实不断地重复报道。
 
  但是,在中国监狱和劳教所里究竟发生了什么却很难得到证实。中国矢口否认因为要强摘法轮功成员的器官而杀害他们。
 
  对法轮功进行客观报道是很难的。我接触过的法轮功信徒似乎对批评都很敏感,而且对不利于他们的媒体报道反应激烈。
 
  本月,加拿大广播公司(简称加广)引起了国际社会的愤怒。在中国大使馆的干预下,加广在最后时刻决定延迟播放一部涉法轮功的纪录片。加广表示,影片需要对某些有争议的片断进行剪辑修正。加广因此被指责为中国政府的“传声筒”。本周,这部英文版纪录片在加广世界新闻频道中播出。
 
  若干年前,当我经过议会山前的草坪,看到法轮功学员向人们展示他们受迫害经历的时候,我开始对法轮功产生了兴趣。他们高举着大幅标语,控诉中国警察对他们进行折磨甚至杀戮的可怕行径。
 
  法轮功是一个集练功与情绪调节为一体的精神运动组织。这一组织由“小号手”李洪志于1992年创立。李洪志称,他的法轮功是建立在气功——中国一种古老的锻炼方式,1980年代起在中国开始复苏——的基础上的。
 
  1999年,中国政府将法轮功(也称“法轮大法”)定性为“邪教”,并且禁止人们学习。法轮功学员称中国共产党的统治是因为他们的日益普及而受到威胁。中国政府认为,法轮功鼓励他们的追随者在生病的时候,拒绝必要的医学治疗。
 
  互联网上充斥着中国法轮功学员遭到囚禁和遭遇所谓谋杀的故事。此类报道通常似乎具有游击性质,比较散,主要集中在以美国为基地的、独立于中国的、自负盈亏的、代表自己声音的《大纪元时报》。但是,《大纪元时报》似乎对反对中共以及罗列反法轮功的罪行等更感兴趣。
 
  今年七月,我为《渥太华公民报》写了一篇关于在国家艺术中心举办的“中国新年文艺演出”的文章,那是我与法轮功的第一次工作性接触。那次演出的所谓定位是“宣扬中国文化”,但是一些观众和我聊天时却表示节目令人沮丧,因为其中穿插了一些描述中国警察杀害法轮功学员的片断。中国大使馆称此次演出活动是在为法轮功做“宣传”,并且谴责出现在演出现场的一些加拿大政治家。
 
  “中国新年文艺演出”活动组委会对中国大使馆的表态很气愤,举行新闻发布公开抨击我的文章,并且反复要求面见我的编辑,讨论修改一些未指明的错误。
 
  今年8月,在基尔格先生和其他西方政治家一起因为中国的器官移植问题而呼吁联合抵制2008北京奥运会之后,我又写了一篇关于法轮功的文章。
 
  我在文章中指出,尽管基尔格·麦塔斯报告的结论被广泛传播,但是他们的观点并没有获得普遍接受。中国政府批评基尔格·麦塔斯报告是伪造的,美国国会研究服务机构则对报告持中性批判立场,认为报告的大部分观点“没有新的或独立获得的论据支撑,而是很大程度上依赖于逻辑推理。”也因为这篇文章,我遭受了来自法轮功学员的严厉批评。文章发表后,我和两名渥太华法轮功学员见面就此文交换意见。他们二话没说就往我的大腿上放了一大堆宣传书籍,还坚持要求我观看所谓介绍天安门自焚事件真相的DVD。
 
  获得关于此事的没有偏见的信息是不容易的。
 
  2006年3月,《大纪元时报》刊登了一篇对自称曾是苏家屯医院员工的一位妇女的采访,此后,苏家屯事件便成为中国人权问题的“引爆点”。
 
  这位名叫“安妮”的妇女称她的前夫曾是一位脑外科医生,曾告诉过她在苏家屯医院三年的时间里,他摘除过2000名法轮功学员的眼角膜。
 
  报道中提到有6000名法轮功学员在医院时被投入监狱。有的病人在活着的时候他们的眼角膜就被摘掉了,死了之后尸体就在医院焚尸炉里烧掉了。
 
  报道强烈地引发了人们对纳粹死亡集中营的联想。
 
  “医院的员工说这些珠宝、手表是从法轮功学员的身上取下来的。他们的器官已被摘除,尸体即将投入焚尸炉。”“安妮”如是说。“医院的员工也说有的人在扔入焚尸炉的时候还活着。”当“安妮”在公众面前现身后,有关她的报道就成为了全球报纸头条。这是一个令人匪夷所思的指控:地球上人口最多的国家因为信仰问题而谋杀她的国民,然后把他们的器官卖给老外。距离奥运会还有两年的时间,这很容易让人将其与希特勒时期的1936年柏林奥运会相比较。
 
  在《大纪元时报》报道后不久,苏家屯附近的美国一领事馆外交官和美国驻北京大使馆有关人员参观了苏家屯地区,但并没有发现有什么不妥。日本和香港的一些记者也来四处看了看,同样空手而归。
 
  如果中国政府允许任何人去参观,那应该首先给此地“消消毒”,法轮功的支持者回应说。他们说“安妮”所指的在2000-2003年间中国的犯罪证据应该早就没有了。
 
  我的关于呼吁联合抵制北京奥运会的文章发表后,中国驻渥太华大使馆联系我,说要和我讨论有关苏家屯的事情。
 
  一位中国大使馆官员问我是否愿意亲自去苏家屯看看。如果我愿意,中华医学会将出钱请我去。中华医学会是一家非政府组织,为40万中国健康护理服务机构代言。它在中共接管中国30多年前,就成立了。而且最近因反对北京,呼吁停止针对死刑犯的器官移植而上了新闻头条。
 
  记者通常可以有陪同去参观,然后就按照自己的想法写文章。但是,在中国的监视下工作,我觉得不自在。而且,我知道以局外人不甚清楚其与中国政府关系的某组织的客人身份去参观,会让我对法轮功的偏见更多。
 
  苏家屯吸引了世界对中国所谓种族灭绝罪行的关注。如果我想探求事情的真相,我就要亲自去医院看看,即使如法轮功所说的那样——犯罪证据早已于很久前就被毁掉了。所以,我同意前往。
 
  之前媒体的报道已让我相信苏家屯血栓病医院位于某偏远的前哨,在那里就可以秘密地执行恐怖暴行。10月份参观医院的时候,我惊讶地发现医院却临近交通便利的闹市区。自行车、行人川流不息,治安员却很少。任何人都可以步行穿过大街去病房。
 
  医院距离沈阳城区有30分钟的车程,沈阳是一个有700万人口的工业化大都会。位于熙熙攘攘的市区使得它似乎不大可能有条不紊地灭绝2000人。如果有人曾计划秘密设立死亡集中营,那么他会找个更好的位置。比如,在莫瑞瓦路建立灭绝中心,那样操作起来可以更隐蔽。
 
  在我采访的那天,医院的大多数病房都住满了病人,接受治疗中风或血液等专科病。几位医院的行政人员和沈阳医院的一位产科大夫作为翻译,陪同我参观了医院。
 
  医院经常使用电脑断层扫描仪和磁共振成像扫描仪,以及基于传统中医药、大规模生产草药香膏的机器。大厦主厅出纳的办公桌是最繁忙的地方,有几十名病人和家属排队等候缴费。
 
  可能被用作火葬场的焚尸楼清晰可见,位于一个门窗都面向医院主楼中心的四合院。
 
  医院主楼四面中的三面均面向四合院,从其中任何一间病房都可以看到锅炉房的大门。将2000具尸体丝毫不被察觉地就带进大楼里似乎是不可能的,不是被病人看到,就是被后街正对面的七层公寓里的住户看到,因为他们可以直视四合院。
 
  同时,焚烧那么多尸体也会引发其他后勤问题。传统的焚尸炉燃烧的温度在1600华氏度至2000华氏度之间,焚烧一具尸体需花费大约2-3个小时。但是焚烧不能使尸体化成灰。内达华州的一位火葬专家迈德尔·库巴斯克先生说骨头碎片仍然可以“清楚地辨认”。
 
  库巴斯克先生说,就算炉子的温度比普通焚尸炉的温度要高,但是,“你仍然可以分辨出这是大腿骨,这是脚趾,这是骨盆,这是头盖骨。”
 
  “人的身体是非常顽强的”,尸骨就这样被医院焚尸炉化为灰烬了?我去采访的那天,医院手术室里正在给一个病人做腿部手术。在手术间隙,陈凤(音)护士长出来跟我们打招呼。当她得知我此行的目的时,脸就沉了下来。1989年,陈女士就来到了这家医院工作。当我问,在她值班时有没有看到犯人被杀掉?话音刚落,就感到这个问题冒犯了她。
 
  陈女士通过翻译气愤地表示:“如果那是真的,我们不都成屠夫了吗?真是可笑!”说着她就戴上口罩回去工作了。
 
  回到加拿大之后,我打电话给基尔格和麦塔斯就苏家屯事件以及他们的所谓发现和他们进行了交流。
 
  当关于医院的争辩出现在《大纪元时报》上之后,一个叫做“法轮功迫害真相联合调查小组”的组织要求基尔格和麦塔斯就此事进行独立调查取证。
 
  但是,基尔格和麦塔斯说,他们没有去过苏家屯,也没有去过中国其他的任何地方,因为中国政府在2006年5、6月份的时候拒绝了他们去中国采访的要求。
 
  2006年7月,他们发表了第一份报告,认为“中共大规模地、强迫性地从法轮功学员身上摘取器官”。他们认为“安妮”的话是可信的,但是她的证词是依赖于那些“和她的表述一致的其他证据”。麦塔斯说,他们的结论不是建立在“安妮”对苏家屯的讲述上的。
 
  麦塔斯告诉我,是听了“安妮”的话他们才被要求去做独立调查的。“安妮”所说的故事之所以列入他们的工作内容,只因为她的话是“前所未有的历史性的表述”。
 
  但是,“我们并没有完全依赖安妮。”麦塔斯说,“我们看了所有的证据,然后得出了结论。”我追问他是否相信苏家屯事件是真的。他说:“我们没有相关的记录可以证实,我们还没有接触具体细节。”
 
  基尔格对我之前写的那篇文章很是气愤。在我们通话的前20分钟,他称呼我为“令人恶心的记者”,说我“没长大脑”,还把我和大屠杀的否认者大卫·厄文相提并论。
 
  他说:“在我们看来,你实际上就是那么做的”,“你否认正在发生的针对法轮功组织的大屠杀暴行。”露西·周——我认识的一名法轮功学员——在我的这篇文章发表之前写信给我的编辑,问《渥太华公民报》是否出版过否认1943年极权主义大屠杀的一个类似故事。
 
  这一点我已经反复考虑过了。作为记者,接受基尔格·麦塔斯的观点从表面上来看是没有任何风险的。毕竟,中国不会指控我犯有诽谤罪。
 
  基尔格·麦塔斯报告的观点也许其他人永远无法去证实,但是要驳倒他们也不容易。如果去质问法轮功或他们的支持者,存在着一个风险,就是,万一非法器官移植的事在日后得到了证实,那将是奇耻大辱。正如基尔格所说的,除了为北京官方媒体服务的那些记者,我是为数不多的如此批评报告的人。历史会带我去寻求“21世纪大屠杀”的证据。
 
  基尔格补充说,因为我以“中华医学会”客人的身份已经去了中国,那我就已经被中国“收买”了。基尔格·麦塔斯报告显示,基尔格所说的33条证据包括中国执行死刑和器官移植的统计学分析。
 
  一些电话记录表明,医院工作人员承认使用了法轮功学员的器官(国会研究服务机构对这些电话记录的真实性提出了质疑,想知道为什么医院的官员在电话里针对如此敏感的问题对陌生人会表现得如此坦率)。基尔格·麦塔斯报告也指出,对于想买器官的外国人来说,在其他国家在很短的时间内就可以买到器官,但是,在中国却要等很久。
 
  不是每个人都认为上述证据都带有强迫性。这33条证据出现在报告的“证据、反驳证据”部分,考虑到上下文的关系,报告对中国有组织的器官捐献体系和腐败问题等就没有提及。
 
  该报告也被认为是中国政府对基尔格·麦塔斯报告的第一个版本回应的证据。最新的版本称中国“不能与基尔格·麦塔斯报告中的结论相矛盾。”
 
  基尔格先生告诉我:“报告综合了所有的33条证据,包括苏家屯事件的证据和安妮说服我的一些言词。”
 
  基尔格先生说,在上海一家医院里,一个不愿透露姓名的亚洲男子的说法令他印象深刻。这名亚洲男子曾两次去过这家医院,为测试与一连串8个备选肾形矿脉的兼容性。
 
  “当他同意时,8个人却在他得到肾之前就死掉了,”基尔格先生说,“我深受震动。”但是,吴弘达却不相信,尽管他与中国政府持不同政见,并曾在中国劳教所里呆过19年。
 
  鲜有人比吴先生更能抨击中国共产党和中国的人权纪录。
 
  吴先生现在华盛顿D.C.的组织“劳改研究基金会”,同样从事证明死刑犯器官用作移植手术的工作。
 
  由于吴先生的专长,使得他被认为是相当可靠的信息来源,而且,因为他个人的经历,法轮功也不能够控告他偏袒中国政府。
 
  吴先生是公开否认法轮功学员因为器官摘取而被屠杀的少数人之一。他说,只是因为没有明显的证据来支持对中国的这一指控。
 
  吴先生和他的研究人员跟踪死刑案件和器官移植案例,他们依据法院档案、医学纪录及目击者证词开展工作。
 
  “所有这些案例涉及到很多法官、检举人、警察、司机、护士和医生。”他告诉《渥太华公民报》,尽管中国政府试图掩盖此事,但是,他们还是拿到了证据。
 
  他说,没有对法轮功犯人进行有组织处死的证据。
 
  “有可能法轮功学员是被治安警察杀害的。也有可能他们被杀了,然后器官被摘走了。但是,证据在哪儿?”他问。
 
  基尔格先生说他在华盛顿见到了吴先生,试图向他说明法轮功的遭遇。
 
  “他是死刑犯问题专家,”基尔格说:“但是,法轮功犯人没有被审讯过、没有被定罪、被带到劳教所后就被处死了。他对此一无所知。”“他不愿意相信指控是真的。他宁愿相信在中国器官被取下的每一个人都是死刑犯。”
 
  但是吴先生坚持抱以怀疑态度。他认为如果要接受法轮功的说法,就必须相信这是一个巨大的阴谋,数以千计的人要对此保持沉默。“他们可以掩盖一个人、两个人,甚至三个人的声音,但是他们能够掩盖所有人的声音吗?”
 
  距离北京奥运会还有不到一年时间,法轮功愤怒的声音会不绝于耳,同时,中国否认的声音也会常常听到。
 
  看你相信谁的,苏家屯要么是中国法轮功被秘密屠杀的许多地点之一,现在已经干净了;要么就只是一家治疗血栓病的破旧的医院。
 
  看你相信谁的,基尔格-麦塔斯报告要么是证明法轮功指控的强有力证据,以“苏家屯事件”作支撑;要么就是基于一系列推测和根本无法支持结论的诱导性推理。
 
  对吴先生来说,后者取决于前者。
 
  “你既然不能确定苏家屯事件是否真实,那我给你提供其他证据。”
 
  “我们不得不谈论苏家屯事件。因为这不是一个或者两个法轮功学员被杀害的简单案例。而是数以千计的人被杀害的重大事件。”他说。
 
  “你们不得不首先证明这个。”
 
  中共活摘法轮功学员器官真相调查网站上有基尔格·麦塔斯报告。
 
 
英文原文:
Inside China's 'crematorium'
 
SHENYANG, China - On a sunny morning last month, two men in blue suits ferried wheelbarrows full of coal into the boiler room that heats the wards of the Liaoning Provincial Thrombosis Hospital. Inside the room, the workers shovelled coal into the chutes to keep the furnaces burning.

Four years ago, it is alleged, these hospital boilers served a sinister purpose. They were used to incinerate the bodies of practitioners of the spiritual movement Falun Gong, it is claimed.

This hospital, in Sujiatun district of the Shenyang City in northeastern China, allegedly functioned as a death camp, where thousands of Falun Gong prisoners were killed and their body parts stolen.

At Sujiatun, surgeons removed the corneas of living prisoners for transplantation, the allegation maintains. More than 2,000 Falun Gong practitioners were killed at Sujiatun, it is claimed, with their bodies burned on site and the furnace chutes stuffed not with coal but cadavers.

If true, the charge would make Sujiatun the point where two insidious human-rights abuses converge the harvesting of organs from the unwilling, and the persecution of religious minorities.

And while the numbers alleged don't come anywhere near the death tolls of Treblinka or Auschwitz, the sheer evil of these purported crimes at Sujiatun certainly evoke Josef Mengele and the worst of the Nazi atrocities.

Still unknown, however, is whether the systemic execution and organ-harvesting of Falun Gong practitioners at Sujiatun -- or elsewhere -- has ever actually happened.

With the 2008 Beijing Olympics approaching and China increasingly in the crucible of global media attention, the allegations are fiercely argued by the Chinese government on one side and Falun Gong on other.

That Falun Gong practitioners have been abused and mistreated is without doubt. Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and the UN's Special Rapporteur on torture have all documented credible reports of arrests, detention and torture of Falun Gong in China.

Yet, the accusation that China systematically executed Falun Gong prisoners to harvest their organs is a substantial escalation that none of these groups have confirmed.

The charge is supported, however, by two prominent Canadians, former MP David Kilgour and Winnipeg lawyer David Matas, whose 2006 report (updated this year) concluded that Falun Gong practitioners were being killed for their organs.

Since the report, Mr. Kilgour has travelled the world to decry organ harvesting and the treatment of the Falun Gong. Western journalists routinely repeat the Kilgour-Matas findings as fact.

But what actually happens behind the walls of Chinese prisons and labour camps is difficult to ascertain. China and its government are often impenetrably opaque to western reporters, who have come to regard its official messages on Falun Gong as little more than state-controlled spin.

China offers blanket denials that Falun Gong members are executed for their organs. But it also contests many of the well-documented charges about the mistreatment of Falun Gong, an apparently benign spiritual movement.

It is also difficult to report objectively on Falun Gong. The Falun Gong adherents I have encountered seem allergic to criticism and react harshly to media coverage that contradicts them.

The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation set off an international furore this month when, at the last moment, it postponed the airing of a documentary on Falun Gong after being contacted by the Chinese Embassy. The CBC says the film required editing in certain contentious segments. For its intervention, the CBC was denounced as a mouthpiece of the Chinese government and accused of political interference. A version of the film aired on CBC Newsworld this week.

My own interest in the Falun Gong was piqued several years ago, when I passed one of the demonstrations its practitioners regularly stage on the front lawn of Parliament Hill. They stood holding banners that depicted gruesome scenes of torture and death at the hands of Chinese police.

Falun Gong is a spiritual movement that combines exercise and mediation. It was developed in 1992 by a former trumpet player named Li Hongzhi. He based his system of mind and body "cultivation" on qi gong, ancient exercises that enjoyed a popular resurgence in China in the 1980s.

By 1999, the Chinese government had labelled Falun Gong, or falun dafa, as it is also known, an "evil cult" and banned its practise. Practitioners say the Chinese Communist Party was threatened by its growing popularity. The government contends that Falun Gong encourages followers to resist medical treatments for illness.

The Internet is swamped by stories detailing the imprisonment and alleged murder of Falun Gong in China. The tone of the reporting often seemed highly partisan, especially coverage from the U.S.-based Epoch Times, a newspaper that bills itself as an independent voice of news from China, but appears chiefly interested in anti-Communist commentary and cataloging crimes against Falun Gong.

My first professional contact with the Falun Gong came in January when I wrote a story for this paper about a Chinese New Year's show held at the National Arts Centre. The performance was promoted as a celebration of Chinese culture, but several audience members I spoke to were dismayed by a segment depicting the murder of a Falun Gong practitioner by Chinese police. The Chinese Embassy called the event "propaganda" and decried the attendance of several Canadian politicians at the show.

The organizing committee of the event responded angrily, holding a press conference to denounce my story and repeatedly demanding to meet with my editors to discuss rectification of unspecified errors.

In August, I wrote another story about Falun Gong after Mr. Kilgour joined with other western politicians to call for a boycott of the 2008 Beijing Olympics over organ harvesting.

The story noted that while the conclusions of Kilgour-Matas report have been widely circulated, they are not universally accepted. The Chinese government had dismissed their work as a fabrication, but more neutral criticism came from the U.S. Congressional Research Service, which concluded the report for the most part "did not bring forth new or independently-obtained testimony and relies largely upon the making of logical inferences." This story also drew intense criticism and charges of bias against me from Falun Gong members. After it was published, I met with two Ottawa Falun Gong practitioners to discuss their concerns. They dumped a pile of printed material in my lap and insisted I watch a video that they claimed proved the self-immolation of Falun Gong in Tiananmen Square was a conspiracy orchestrated by the Chinese government to discredit Falun Gong.

Getting unbiased information about the issue was not going to be easy.

In March 2006, Sujiatun became ground zero for human rights concerns about China when the Epoch Times published an interview with a woman who said she was a former employee of the hospital.

The woman, identified only as "Annie," claimed her ex-husband was a surgeon who told her that he had removed the corneas of 2,000 Falun Gong practitioners in the Sujiatun hospital over a three-year period.

As many as 6,000 Falun Gong practitioners had been imprisoned in the hospital, the story said. Corneas were removed, some while the patients were alive, then the bodies cremated in the hospital boiler.

The story strongly evoked imagery of the Nazi death camps.

"It is said by the employees in the hospital these jewelry and watches were collected from the Falun Gong practitioners whose organs had been removed when they were about to be thrown in the boiler to be burned," Annie was quoted as saying. "It is also said by the employees in the hospital, some were still alive when being thrown into the boiler." When Annie went public, her story made headlines across the globe. It was a fantastic charge: the most populous nation on Earth was murdering its own citizens for their religious beliefs and then selling their body parts to foreigners. With the Olympics two years away, comparisons to Hitler's 1936 Berlin Games came easily.

Shortly after the Epoch Times story, diplomats from a nearby U.S. consulate and the U.S. Embassy in Beijing visited the Sujiatun site and found nothing amiss. A few journalists from Japan and Hong Kong came to look around and also left empty handed.

If the Chinese government allowed anyone to visit the site, it would have been sanitized first, Falun Gong supporters responded. The evidence of the crimes Annie alleged occurred between 2000 and 2003 would have been long gone, they said.

After my story about the call for an Olympic boycott, the Chinese Embassy in Ottawa contacted me to discuss the references to Sujiatun.

Would I like to see the hospital for myself, an embassy official asked. The Chinese Medical Association would take me there, at their expense, if I agreed. The Chinese Medical Association MA is a non-governmental organization that represents more than 400,000 Chinese health-care providers. It predates the Communist takeover of China by over 30 years, and had recently made headlines for opposing Beijing and calling for an end of organ transplants from executed criminals.

Journalist often get escorted tours of facilities they write about, but I was uneasy about working in China under the watch of a minder. And I knew travelling as the guest of an organization that would be indistinguishable from the Chinese government to outsiders would expose me to more charges of bias from the Falun Gong.

Still, Sujiatun had drawn the world's attention to alleged crimes that amounted to genocide. If I was going to write about the issue, I should see the hospital, even if -- as claimed -- the evidence of atrocities had long ago been cleansed. I agreed to go.

From media reports, I had been led to believe that the Thrombosis Hospital was located in some distant outpost, where the awful crimes within could be conducted out of sight. When I visited the hospital in October, I was surprised to find it next to a busy street with snarling traffic, a constant flow of bicycles and pedestrians, and little security. Anyone could walk in off the street into the wards.

The hospital is about a 30-minute drive from downtown Shenyang, an industrialized, but cosmopolitan, city of seven million. Its location in a bustling suburb made it seem an unlikely spot to conduct the methodical extermination of 2,000 human beings. If one were planning to set up a death camp and intending to do it discreetly, one could find better locations. An extermination centre on Merivale Road could operate more covertly.

On the day I visited, most of the wards inside were full with patients receiving treatment for strokes or blood clots, the hospital's specialty. My tour was led by several hospital administrators and an obstetrician from a Shenyang hospital who had been recruited as an interpreter.

The CT scanners and MRI scanner were in constant use, as was the machinery in the pharmacy that mass-produced herbal balms based on traditional Chinese medicine. The busiest spot in the building was cashier's desk in the main lobby, where dozens of patients and family members were lined up to pay for services rendered.

The boiler building that was supposedly used as a crematorium was in plain sight, with windows and a door that open to the quadrangle at the centre of the main hospital building.

The door to the building could be seen from any of the wards that look out on the quadrangle from three of the four sides of the hospital. It seemed unlikely that 2,000 cadavers could be brought to the building unseen, if not by the patients in the wards, then by residents of the seven-storey apartment building directly across the street, which had a direct sight line to the quadrangle.

The cremation of so many bodies would have created other logistical problems. In a conventional cremation oven, which burns at between 1600 and 2000 degrees Fahrenheit, it takes about two or three hours to incinerate a human body. But cremation does not reduce a body to ash. Skeletal fragments remain that are "very identifiable," according to Michael Kubasak, a Nevada cremation expert.

"You would be able to say, Here's the femur, here are the toes, here's the pelvis, here's the skull," Mr. Kubasak said. Even if the boilers burned hotter than a normal crematorium, the bones would likely remain, he said.

"The human body is very tough." Could the bones have been removed from the boilers at the hospital? Would the perpetrators of the alleged crimes have taken the trouble to grind the bones up? Or could they be disposed of in another way? On the day I visited, an orthopedic surgery on a patient's leg was under way in the operating theatre. During a break, head nurse Chen Feng came out to greet us. When she was told why I was there, her face darkened. Ms. Chen had worked at the hospital since 1989. The claim that prisoners were slaughtered on her watch deeply offended her.

"If that's true, we're like butchers," she said angrily, through my interpreter. "Ridiculous," she snorted, then pulled on her surgical mask and went back to work.

When I returned to Canada, I called Mr. Matas and Mr. Kilgour to talk about Sujiatun and their findings.

After the allegations about the hospital surfaced in the Epoch Times, a group called the Coalition to Investigate the Persecution of the Falun Gong asked them to conduct an independent investigation of the issue.

They were unable to see Sujiatun, or anywhere else in China, they said, because the Chinese government refused their requests to visit while working on their report in May and June 2006.

Their first report, issued in July 2006, concluded there had been "large scale organ seizures from unwilling Falun Gong practitioners." They found Annie credible, but said her testimony was relied on only where it was "corroborative and consistent with other evidence." Their findings stood without Annie's claims about Sujiatun, Mr. Matas said.

Annie's original allegation was the reason they were asked to investigate, he told me. Her story was included in their work only as the "historical narrative," he said.

"We didn't rely on her," Mr. Matas said. "We looked at all the evidence together and came to that conclusion." I pressed him on whether he believed the story about Sujiatun.

"We don't have the records, we can't get into that level of detail," he said.

Mr. Kilgour was angered by the previous story I had written. In the first 20 minutes of our phone conversation, he called me "a lousy journalist," told me I don't "have any brains" and compared me to Holocaust denier David Irving.

"Essentially, in our view, that's what you're doing," he said. "You're a denier that this is happening to the Falun Gong community." This would turn out to be a familiar response to questions about the Falun Gong. Mr. Kilgour's co-author, Mr. Matas, wrote a lengthy submission to the Citizen about organ harvesting in which he referenced Holocaust denial. Lucy Zhou, one of the Falun Gong practitioners I met with, wrote to my editors in advance of this story to ask if the Citizen would have published in 1943 a similar story denying slaughter by a totalitarian regime.

It was a point that I had repeatedly considered. As a reporter, there is no risk in accepting the Kilgour-Matas conclusions at face value. Most of my colleagues in the Canadian media had, as evidenced by recent coverage of the CBC imbroglio. China couldn't sue for libel, after all.

The findings of the Kilgour-Matas report might never be proven by others, but there is little chance they will be disproved. By questioning the Falun Gong or their supporters, however, one risks unparalleled humiliation if the claims of organ harvesting are later corroborated. As Mr. Kilgour pointed out, I was among the few journalists, other than those working for state media in Beijing, who had written so critically of his report. History could make me into a modern day Tokyo Rose by asking for proof of a 21st century Holocaust.

And, Mr. Kilgour added, because I had gone to China as a guest of the Chinese Medical Association, I had been "bought and paid for." The Kilgour-Matas report presents what Mr. Kilgour calls 33 branches of evidence, including a statistical analysis of executions and transplants conducted in China.

It offers transcripts of telephone calls in which hospital staff across China are said to be confessing to the use of organs from Falun Gong prisoners. (The Congressional research service raised doubts about the authenticity of these calls, wondering why hospital officials would be so candid about such a sensitive issue with strangers on the phone. Mr. Kilgour explains that only a small percentage of the hospitals contacted admitted they used Falun Gong organs.) The Kilgour-Matas report also points to the extremely short time foreigners who were willing to pay for organ transplants had to wait in China, compared to other countries.

Not everyone would consider all these branches as compelling evidence. Among the 33 elements listed under "proof and disproof," the report counts contextual information, such as the absence of an organized organ-donation system in China and corruption across the country.

The report also counts as evidence the response from the government of China to the first edition of the report. The updated version claims China is "unable to contradict" the findings.

"It's the combination of all 33, including the Sujiatun evidence and the statement by Annie that persuaded me," Mr. Kilgour told me.

The most personally compelling, Mr. Kilgour said, was the testimony of an unnamed Asian man who went to a hospital in Shanghai, where his compatibility was tested for a match against a succession of eight kidneys during two separate visits.

"As he agreed, eight human beings died before he got a kidney," Mr. Kilgour said. "I was deeply effected by that." Among the unconvinced, however, is Harry Wu, a prominent Chinese dissident who spent 19 years in a Chinese forced labour camp.

Few have been more critical of the Communist Party of China and its human rights record that Mr. Wu. In the 1980s, he exposed the system of forced labour in China and did for the "laogai" what Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn did for the gulags of Stalin's Soviet Union.

Mr. Wu's Washington, D.C.-based organization, the Laogai Research Foundation, was also instrumental in proving that organs of executed criminals were used for transplants.

Mr. Wu's expertise makes him a highly credible source and, because of his personal experience, the Falun Gong could not accuse him of bias in favour of China's government.

Mr. Wu stands among the few to publicly deny claims that Falun Gong practitioners were killed for their organs. There is, he says, simply no compelling evidence to support them.

When Mr. Wu and his researchers were tracking death-penalty cases and organ transplants, they worked from court files, medical records and eyewitness testimony.

"In all these cases there is a number of the judges, prosecutors, policemen, drivers, nurses and doctors," he told the Citizen. The Chinese government had tried to keep the issue under wraps, yet still evidence could be obtained.

There is no such corroboration of the systemic execution of Falun Gong prisoners, he says.

"It is possible Falun Gong practitioners were killed by the security police. It is also possible that they were killed and removed the organs. But where are the documents?" he asked.

Mr. Kilgour says he met with Mr. Wu in Washington and tried to explain what was happening to the Falun Gong.

"He's an expert on the executed prisoners," Mr. Kilgour said, "but he knows nothing about the Falun Gong prisoners who don't get trials, don't get convictions. They just get executed after they go to work camps.

"He doesn't want to believe that. He wants to believe everybody that has had their organs taken in China is an executed criminal." But Mr. Wu remains unconvinced. To accept the Falun Gong claims, one must believe in a massive conspiracy that requires the co-operation of tens of thousands of participants to remain silent, he says.

"They can cover up one or two or three. Can they cover all of them?" he said.

With the Beijing Olympics less than a year away, the outrage about Falun Gong organs will likely be heard with increasing frequency, as will the denials from China.

Depending on who you believe, Sujiatun is either one of many sanitized crime scenes across China where Falun Gong were secretly slaughtered, or merely a shabby mid-sized hospital that treats bloodclots.

Depending on who you believe, the Kilgour-Matas report is either compelling evidence that proves the claims about Falun Gong, with or without support of Sujiatun, or a collection of conjecture and inductive reasoning that fails to support its own conclusions.

To Mr. Wu, the latter depends on the former.

"You can't say if Sujiatun is not true, I can offer other evidence.

"We have to talk about Sujiatun. It's not like one or two practitioners were killed. It's thousands," he said.

"You have to prove this first."

The Kilgour-Matas report is available at: organharvestinvestigation.net.

The Chinese government response is online at: www.chinaembassycanada.org/eng/xwdt/t265055.htm.

Glen McGregor is a Citizen reporter.

(The Ottawa Citizen, Saturday, November 24, 2007)

分享到:
责任编辑: