Chinese communist government mosque and church demolition, Islamic persecution, why no international outcry?

Dec 2018
China is harvesting organs from detainees, tribunal concludes

An independent tribunal sitting in London has concluded that the killing of detainees in China for organ transplants is continuing, and victims include imprisoned followers of the Falun Gong movement.

The China Tribunal, chaired by Sir Geoffrey Nice QC, who was a prosecutor at the international criminal tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, said in a unanimous determination at the end of its hearings it was “certain that Falun Gong as a source - probably the principal source - of organs for forced organ harvesting”.

“The conclusion shows that very many people have died indescribably hideous deaths for no reason, that more may suffer in similar ways and that all of us live on a planet where extreme wickedness may be found in the power of those, for the time being, running a country with one of the oldest civilisations known to modern man.”

He added: “There is no evidence of the practice having been stopped and the tribunal is satisfied that it is continuing.”

The tribunal has been taking evidence from medical experts, human rights investigators and others.

China is harvesting organs from detainees, tribunal concludes
Likes: Ashoka maurya
Dec 2018
Chinese dissidents are being executed for their organs, former hospital worker says

Zheng Qiaozhi — we will call him George — still has nightmares. He was interning at China’s Shenyang Army General Hospital when he was drafted to be part of an organ-harvesting team.

The prisoner was brought in, tied hand and foot, but very much alive. The army doctor in charge sliced him open from chest to belly button and exposed his two kidneys. “Cut the veins and arteries,” he told his shocked intern. George did as he was told. Blood spurted everywhere.

The kidneys were placed in an organ-transplant container.

Then the doctor ordered George to remove the man’s eyeballs. Hearing that, the dying prisoner gave him a look of sheer terror, and George froze. “I can’t do it,” he told the doctor, who then quickly scooped out the man’s eyeballs himself.


Ad Honorem
Dec 2012
And no, the Chinese are not behaving like Nazis. This is a standard SJW tactic of comparing anything you disagree with to the extreme worst example you could imagine. The Nazis had gas chambers. Are Muslims being gassed? The Chinese camps are more akin to American internment camps but instead of using logic, you appeal to emotion and compare it with Nazis.
This is now par for the course.
Feb 2011

In March 2006, U.S. Falun Gong representatives claimed that thousands ofpractitioners had been sent to 36 concentration camps throughout the PRC,particularly in the northeast, and that many of them were killed for profit through theharvesting and sale of their organs. Many of these claims were based upon allegations about one such camp in Sujiatun, a district of Shenyang city in Liaoningprovince. The Epoch Times, a U.S.-based newspaper affiliated with Falun Gong, first reported the story as told by a Chinese journalist based in Japan and a former employee of a Sujiatun hospital that allegedly operated the camp and served as an organ harvesting center.23 According to Epoch Times reports, of an estimated 6,000 Falun Gong adherents detained there, three-fourths allegedly had their organs removed and then were cremated or never seen again.24 American officials from theU.S. Embassy in Beijing and the U.S. consulate in Shenyang visited the area as wellas the hospital site on two occasions — the first time unannounced and the second with the cooperation of PRC officials — and after investigating the facility “found no evidence that the site is being used for any function other than as a normal publichospital.”25 Amnesty International spokespersons have stated that the claims of systematic organ harvesting of Falun Gong practitioners cannot be confirmed or denied. The PRC government has rejected claims about live organ harvesting of FalunGong practitioners. In December 2005, Chinese officials reportedly confirmed that executed prisoners had been “among the sources of organs for transplant” and admitted that a market for such organs had existed, but denied that they had beenremoved without consent.26 In March 2006, the Chinese Ministry of Health announced stricter regulations that would require written consent from organ donors,ban the sale of human organs, and limit the number of hospitals allowed to perform transplants.27

The Kilgour-Matas Report.

On July 6, 2006, two Canadian investigators,former Liberal Member of Parliament David Kilgour and David Matas, aninternational human rights attorney, published Report into Allegations of Organ Harvesting of Falun Gong Practitioners in China. The report concludes that the allegations that “large numbers” of Falun Gong practitioners in the People’s Republic of China (PRC) have been victims of live organ harvesting are true.28 For the most part, however, the report does not bring forth new or independently-obtained testimony and relies largely upon the making of logical inferences. The authors had conducted their investigation in response to a request by the Coalition to Investigate the Persecution of the Falun Gong in China (CIPFG), a U.S.-based, non-profit organization founded by the Falun Dafa Association in April 2006. In addition to interviewing the same former Sujiatun hospital worker as featured in the Epoch Times, Kilgour and Matas refer to recordings of telephone conversations provided by CIPFG. In these recorded calls that CIPFG members allegedly made from locations outside China to PRC hospitals, police bureaus, and detention centers, telephone respondents reportedly indicated that organ harvesting of live Falun Gong detaineeswas common. Although many claims and arguments in the Kilgour-Matas report are widely accepted by international human rights experts, some of the reports’s key allegationsappear to be inconsistent with the findings of other investigations.29 The report’s conclusions rely heavily upon transcripts of telephone calls in which PRC respondents reportedly stated that organs removed from live Falun Gong detainees were used for transplants. Some argue that such apparent candor would seem unlikely given Chinese government controls over sensitive information, which may raise questions about the credibility of the telephone recordings.


EastSouthWestNorth: Wu Hongda's Statement on the Sujiatun Concentration Camp

Wu Hongda's Statement on the Sujiatun Concentration Camp

Harry Wu, also known as Wu Hongda, heads the China Information Center, which is a dissident website based in the United States. The following is a summary of his investigation and travails in the matter of the Sujiatun affair.


I felt that the two "witnesses" were unreliable and this story may be intentionally fabricated. I attempted to contact Falun Gong spokesperson Zhang Erping on his mobile phone and asked him to talk to me about the Sujiatun affair, but I never got a reply from him.

At the same time, I arranged for people inside China to visit the Sujiatun scene. From March 12, the investigators canvassed the entire Sujiatun area. On March 17, the investigators visited two military barracks in Sujiatun. On March 27, the investigators secretly visited the Chinese Medical Blood Clotting Treatment Center in Sujiatun. On March 29, the investigators went to the Kongjiashan prison near Sujiatun. None of the aforementioned investigations revealed any trace of the concentration camp. The investigators provided me with photographs and written reports on their investigation and results on March 15, 17, 27, 29, 30 and April 4.


Ad Honorem
Jun 2014
Lisbon, Portugal
are you thinking all western and muslim media like al-jazeera will not bias and spread propaganda, add some lies in their news....
It's not only the referred media that is leading the campaign against China's apparent oppression in Xinjiang province, but we also have tons of reports from independent NGO's such as Amnesty International reporting the existence of the same camps and actions of cultural repression on the part of the Chinese government towards the Uyghur minority.

Fair to say that nothing is actually confirmed and we (including you) don't know exactly for sure what is happening inside those camps or the true nature of the anti-extremism policies in Xinjiang, but the the large number of accounts coming from NGO's regarding the deplorable human right's situation inside Xinjiang makes it so that we should at least suspect that something wrong is going there and the Chinese government could and should be more transparent to the international community about this very issue.

Of course the outside powers that feel China as a threat will try to use this occurring situation to their favor, but that doesn't automatically means that the human right's abuse happening in Xinjiang is entirely fake, and if China doesn't want this kind of negative news to spread around the world, they shouldn't make this kind of policies in the first place (if those policies are truly being pursued).
Likes: Azad67
Feb 2011
The problem is a lot of NGO information come from non-NGO information. Look at the two Iraq wars, with the Nayirah testimony corroborated by Amnesty International, and only corrected itself once it was too late. Again, I don't deny that there is a discrimination problem especially against Uyghurs, but I don't find accusations such as 2 out of 5 adult Uyghurs being in a concentration camp as sober accusations.

The following is also something I found interesting, because I know one of these "cadres" that Carl Zha was describing: EP#55 Trouble on the Silk Road: Real Situation of Uyghurs in China | Carl Zha on Patreon
Project “paired Han Chinese government workers from Northern Xinjiang with Uyghur families in Southern Xinjiang. They have to go visit them, spend time with them, live with them, you know, try to learn their ways. And supposedly, the aim is for China to understand the issue that the family is facing and how to help the family, right? Of course in Radio Free Asia reporting that issue is turned into sending Han Chinese spies inside every Uyghur family and if they find disagreeable comments and the family member gets sent into a re-education camp, right? I will share what I knew about this. I actually knew about this program and this initially started several years ago. And initially it was a program that was copied from a similar policy that the Chinese government adopted in Tibet. This is where originally the Chinese government will have a coastal city pair up with a town in Tibet or Xinjiang. And what they do is …. certain Chinese officials from that coastal city were sent to that town in Tibet or Xinjiang and coordinate investment or aid from that city. The coastal Chinese city is now responsible for the wellfare of that town by providing the funds for some infrastructure improvement, as well as finding investment opportunities into the region, right? And so to do this they bring cadres from the coastal Chinese area in there for a couple years, right? But, you have to understand, Han Chinese in the coastal area, they don’t want to go there, right? This is actually considered a hazard. So in compensation, this cadre, after a couple years in Tibet or Xinjiang, when they return back to their home city, they get promoted. They get straight tracked for promotion.

The person I know was sent to a mountain village. His experience happened decades ago, so Carl probably wasn't correct to say that this happened only several years ago. Anyway, the village was incredibly poor, so it wasn't exactly a pleasant experience but at least he now have a good story to tell. The village was living off of a dead land, their sole source of firewood coming from dead tree stumps because there was no live trees anymore. Obviously this wasn't going to be sustainable for long, there's only so many dead trees. The land was simply all used up. When he went back he wrote a report about how the village people should either be relocated to more fertile land, or have the government employ the villagers in a reforestation program. In which case they would be paid as government employees because there wasn't any other customers who's going to pay them to plant trees. He was not a government official, but he was reporting to the government in this one scenario.
Last edited:

Similar History Discussions