Jenny Tonge: how dare she?


By Peter Simon
February 15, 2010
Share

The following is the text of an article from the [hated] Guardian published in December 2009. Articles on the same subject appeared at around the same time in many other media throughout the world and the matter featured on Israeli TV.

One can hardly blame Jenny Tonge for calling for an inquiry into allegations of organ harvesting in Haiti when the state concerned previously lied about its involvement in this practice - only eventually to admit that it did in fact go on. It is pathetic that she is now pilloried in the press - effectively by permission of the cowardly Nick Clegg - as [inevitably and wearily] an 'anti-semite'.

'Israel has admitted that in the 1990s, its forensic pathologists harvested organs from dead bodies, including Palestinians, without permission of their families.

The issue emerged with publication of an interview with the then-head of Israel's Abu Kabir forensic institute, Dr. Jehuda Hiss. The interview was conducted in 2000 by an American academic, who released it because of a huge controversy last summer over an allegation by a Swedish newspaper that Israel was killing Palestinians in order to harvest their organs. Israel hotly denied the charge.

Parts of the interview were broadcast on Israel's Channel 2 TV over the weekend. In it, Hiss said, "We started to harvest corneas ... Whatever was done was highly informal. No permission was asked from the family."

The Channel 2 report said that in the 1990s, forensic 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.

In a response to the TV report, the Israeli military confirmed that the practice took place. "This activity ended a decade ago and does not happen any longer," the military said in a statement quoted by Channel 2.

In the interview, Hiss described how his doctors would mask the removal of corneas from bodies. "We'd glue the eyelid shut," he said. "We wouldn't take corneas from families we knew would open the eyelids."

Many of the details in the interview first came to light in 2004, when Hiss was dismissed as head of the forensic institute because of irregularities over use of organs there. Israel's attorney general dropped criminal charges against him, and Hiss still works as chief pathologist at the institute. He had no comment on the TV report.

Complaints against the institute, where autopsies of dead bodies are performed, at the time of Hiss' dismissal came from relatives of Israeli soldiers and civilians as well as Palestinians. The bodies belonged to people who died from various causes, including diseases, accidents and Israeli-Palestinian violence, but there has been no evidence to back up the claim in the Swedish newspaper Aftonbladet that Israeli soldiers killed Palestinians for their organs. Angry Israeli officials called the report "anti-Semitic."

The academic, Nancy Sheppard-Hughes, a professor of anthropology at the University of California-Berkeley, said she decided to make the interview public in the wake of the Aftonbladet controversy, which raised diplomatic tensions between Israel and Sweden and prompted Sweden's foreign minister to call off a visit to the Jewish state.

Sheppard-Hughes said that while Palestinians were "by a long shot" not the only ones affected by the practice in the 1990s, she felt the interview must be made public now 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."

While insisting that all organ harvesting was done with permission, Israel's Health Ministry told Channel 2, "The guidelines at that time were not clear." It added, "For the last 10 years, Abu Kabir has been working according to ethics and Jewish law."

COMMENTS

John Gold

15 February, 2010 - 01:15

Rate this:

0 points

I don't get what you're trying to say from this?

It's clear Israel did such (despicable) things in the past, and although admitted it happened - didn't ever apologise or recompense the victims (families). It could logically be said that if someone shows no repentance or shows no guilt for an action that they are likely to do it again, or show disregard in another form. That's not to say that Israel have, but you can understand why others would be suspicious.


Blacklisted Dictator

15 February, 2010 - 04:32

Rate this:

0 points

The following is from Melanie Phillips' "Spectator" blog:

"The Tragic Coma of English reason"

In recent days, an open and unambiguous medieval-style blood libel has been regurgitated in the mainstream British media. This has been full of the sensational report that Israeli doctors had been ’harvesting’ the organs of Palestinians. The implication was that a) this was only being done to Palestinians and b) the Palestinians had been alive when it was done. Neither calumny was remotely true.

What had actually happened was that – as Tom Gross has noted -- some 15 years ago one rogue Israeli doctor had been transplanting minor organs like cornea and skin from dead Israelis – mainly Jewish Israelis, but also a few Arab ones – without obtaining permission from the families. This is on a par with a similar scandal in Britain, where it was discovered that doctors had been removing organs from dead children as a matter of routine without informing their parents.

In the Israelis case, there was no use of organs from living patients. There was no singling out of Palestinians. Yet that was the impression created by one disgusting media report after another. As Gross observes, so far it is only the Guardian which has had the grace to acknowledge its error and put out a correction. No-one else seems to have bothered.

Such blood libels incites people to murderous hatred of Jews, for which purpose they have been used throughout history. Yet as Gross reports, as of yesterday evening for the second day running the BBC Persian service was continuing to transmit the appalling lie that Israel was ‘harvesting’ the organs of Palestinians -- thus further inflaming a country whose leadership is already committed to the genocide of the Jews.

This ‘harvested organ’ blood libel surfaced in 2001 amongst the Palestinians; more recently and notoriously, it was given a new lease of life by the Swedish newspaper Aftenbladet; the editor of that paper subsequently admitted that his reporter had confessed that there was absolutely no evidence to support this accusation, which was based solely upon some statements made by several Palestinians in Gaza.

The Arab and Muslim world routinely circulates grotesque blood libels like this, often involving accusations that Jews are murdering and cannibalising Arab and Muslim children or else are poisoning the water supply or ( a recent variation) adulterating it with aphrodisiacs. These literally deranged and demented fantasies have until now been ignored by an indifferent west, for whom the reality of this Arab and Muslim derangement vis a vis the Jews was simply too inconvenient to their grand narrative of Israeli aggression to be reported. Now the western media has gone one step further. They are themselves reporting these sick and murderous fabrications as credible accusations.

The west has simply suspended reason for the duration.

I ask again: where is all this leading?


Blacklisted Dictator

15 February, 2010 - 04:38

Rate this:

0 points

Guardian: Our Israeli organ harvesting headline was serious error

By Gili Izikovitch, Haaretz Correspondent

The British paper The Guardian issued a correction on Tuesday, conceding that it should not have run the headline "Israel admits harvesting Palestinian organs" on a story that, according to the correction, "did not match the article."

"We should not have put the headline on a story about an admission, by the former head of the Abu Kabir forensic institute near Tel Aviv, that during the 1990s specialists at the institute harvested organs" the correction on the Guardian website read.

"That headline did not match the article, which made clear that the organs were not taken only from Palestinians. This was a serious editing error and the headline has been changed online to reflect the text of the story written by the reporter."

The story, whose headline was changed to "Doctor admits Israeli pathologists harvested organs without consent," quoted a report by Channel 2's Ulpan Shishi last week, which included a 2000 interview with Professor Yehuda Hiss, former head of the Abu Kabir forensic institute.


Blacklisted Dictator

15 February, 2010 - 07:05

Rate this:

0 points

Tom,
ouyside?
sensi le?
house of Lords?

Are you typing faster than your brain can "think"?


Blacklisted Dictator

15 February, 2010 - 07:27

Rate this:

0 points

Tom,
And the "thinking"? Are you also going to blame that on your " i phone"?

And is not Herr Diktator a "ghetto mentality" jibe? Perhaps you have become infected by The
Jews that are blogging on this site? Please stop
defaming the Germans.


Blacklisted Dictator

15 February, 2010 - 07:42

Rate this:

0 points

Tom,

It is... House of Lords. Not house of Lords.

I bet that you thought it was where the Lords lived!

You won't win any arguments if your readers think that you are clueless.


Jon_i_Cohen

15 February, 2010 - 08:27

Rate this:

0 points

@tomeisner2
"The beauty of Jenny being in the house of Lords is that she is there for life"
Your words, but as a committed "trendy-lefty, I am surprised you support The House Of Lords; I thought you would screaming that it is an "anti democratic institution.
Every, (stupid), comment you make on these blogs seems to dig you deeper into your delusional hole.


Jon_i_Cohen

15 February, 2010 - 08:30

Rate this:

0 points

As for the Guardians apologies or "serious error", with a vehemently antisemitic streak running throughtout the writing staff I would substitute every "serious error" they print an apology for simply being a new Guardian buzzword to cover up their antisemitism.


Yvetta

15 February, 2010 - 09:27

Rate this:

0 points

I find it obscene that Israel (clearly for some "The Jew among the Nations") should be expected to hold an enquiry into a Blood Libel.
It is tantamount to demanding that medieval Jewry should hold an enquiry into whether Jews have horns, whether they have a distinctive odour that is erased with baptism, whether they desecrate the Christian communion wafer, whether they poison wells, whether they caused the Black Death ...
Tonge clearly has an issue with Jews. Clegg clearly has an issue about giving her the full discipline she deserves.


tomeisner2

15 February, 2010 - 10:21

Rate this:

0 points

Jenny Tonge is still a Lord which is more than you are J Cohen and there is nothing you can do about this. She will be there for the rest of her days and as long as Israel continues to act as it does she will continue to criticise, also nothing that you can do anything about. Bad luck old sport!


Jon_i_Cohen

15 February, 2010 - 10:58

Rate this:

0 points

"Lord"
Is she/he a transexual then?


Yvetta

15 February, 2010 - 11:38

Rate this:

0 points

She undoubtedly loves the uncle Toms.


tomeisner2

15 February, 2010 - 11:39

Rate this:

0 points

Praise the Lord!


tomeisner2

15 February, 2010 - 11:43

Rate this:

0 points

Have you ever met a Palestinian Yvetta?


Blacklisted Dictator

15 February, 2010 - 12:15

Rate this:

0 points

I wonder whether the term "trendy lefty" should be allowed on the JC blog. After all, it is demeaning to people who are on the left of the political spectrum. 'Trendy" is used as a term of opprobrium and is malign and condescending in its intent.

May I suggest that in the future we all, instead, agree to use... "to the left of the political spectrum"?


Blacklisted Dictator

15 February, 2010 - 12:34

Rate this:

0 points

Alternatively... " a fashion conscious man or woman who votes Labour or Liberal Tongocrat"


Jon_i_Cohen

15 February, 2010 - 12:36

Rate this:

0 points

BD
Funny guy!
Keep it going!


Blacklisted Dictator

15 February, 2010 - 12:36

Rate this:

0 points

Alternatively.. "an anti-zionist who wears designer jeans"


Blacklisted Dictator

15 February, 2010 - 12:40

Rate this:

0 points

Alernatively.. " a sympathizer of Ahmadinejad's Iran, but unable, for some reason or other, to go there on holiday."


Blacklisted Dictator

15 February, 2010 - 12:49

Rate this:

0 points

Alternatively ..." an antisemite in the latest anti-zionist clothes"


Blacklisted Dictator

15 February, 2010 - 12:51

Rate this:

0 points

Alternatively.. "an antisemite in anti-racist NGO's."