使用者:Stang/柯文哲疑涉協助病人獲得法輪功學員器官事件

2014年8月，伊森‧葛特曼（Ethan Gutmann）出版《屠宰》（The Slaughter）一書，其中提到柯文哲向作者透露曾經到中國大陸去幫助他的病人取得器官，而大陸醫生許諾為其提供法輪功學員的器官。這些內容披露後，在2014年台北市長選舉中引起軒然大波，柯文哲說作者「穿鑿附會」，「吹牛吹過頭」。2014年12月，在柯文哲當選市長之後，葛特曼在其網站公布相關資料，證明柯文哲曾經看過有關內容的初稿並同意出版。台灣大多數媒體對這一進展保持沉默，而個別媒體則扭曲葛特曼的本意。柯文哲本人也沒有任何回應。目前，這件事情的真相依然未明。

背景

參見：中國器官移植

中國大陸器官移植的供體長期主要來自死囚。根據器官移植專家、前衛生部副部長黃潔夫等2012年在柳葉刀（The Lancet）發表的文章，中國是唯一系統性依賴死囚提供器官的國家，移植器官的65%來自死者，其中90%是已執行的死囚。2014年12月4日，黃潔夫宣布，中國自2015元旦起禁止使用死囚器官。

但是，法輪功指控中國政府活摘其成員的器官，在國外亦有喬高-麥塔斯調查報告（Kilgour-Matas report）支持這種說法。中國政府則完全否定。

柯文哲與《屠宰》一書

柯文哲在台大醫院工作期間是台灣器官移植界的重要人物。他在台大醫院建立了「標準器官移植程序」，以維持器官移植手術的水準，增加病人存活率，後經衛生署推廣至全國。2002年，他接受衛生署委託，建立了台灣器官捐贈登錄製度。自1999年11月起，他擔任台大醫院器官移植管理委員會委員兼執行秘書，併兼任器捐勸募小組負責醫師職務。在2011年台大醫院失誤移植愛滋病患器官案發生後，柯文哲受到監察院彈劾並受到公懲會懲處，這是導致他決定參選台北市市長的主要原因。

葛特曼是一名長期對中國大陸摘取法輪功學員器官問題進行調查的作家和記者。2008年7月，葛特曼透過關係見到柯文哲並對其進行採訪，法輪功美國學員林理善(Leeshai Lemish)擔任翻譯。2012年9月12日在美國眾議院外交委員會調查聽證會作證時，葛特曼曾提到了這次採訪，但沒有披露柯的名字。 2014年8月，葛特曼出版《屠宰：大規模殺害，摘取器官以及中國對異議人士的秘密處理方法》（The Slaughter：Mass Killing，Organ Harvesting, and China's Secret Solution to Its Dissident Problem）一書，這次採訪的內容出現在第九章之中。

根據此書描述，柯文哲到大陸去為他的病人尋求器官，但他非常擔心死刑犯器官的質量，也覺得台灣病人要付外國人的價格很不公平。在與大陸外科醫生吃飯、喝酒、唱卡拉OK、恭維和開玩笑之後，對方把他當成了兄弟，承諾給他自己人的價格，而且提供最好的器官：法輪功學員的器官。柯文哲也曾試圖向大陸推銷他設計的器官登錄系統，被對方謝絕了。書中還寫道，在這次採訪之後，柯文哲被禁止進入中國。在一個注釋中，作者特別指出，由於這個採訪極為重要，有關內容的初稿曾給柯文哲看過，柯予以核准（sign off），在另一個注釋中，作者註明柯文哲同意暴露其姓名，但無意對媒體重複講訴有關內容，可以考慮在國會作證。

在2014年1月寫作此書時，葛特曼知道柯文哲已經成為台灣政壇的重要人物，正在參選台北市長，也預見到他的這些經歷會成為對手攻擊的目標。葛特曼特別強調柯文哲願意坦白地談這些事情是一種奇異的勇氣（singular courage）的體現，他的敘述是關鍵性證據（smoking gun），是長期尋找中國摘取良心犯器官的確鑿醫學證據的頂峰。

台北市長選舉中的爭議

2014年10月，長期關注中國摘取法輪功學員器官問題的律師童文薰在其臉書上對葛特曼新書有關內容做了介紹，並鼓勵柯文哲站出來證實相關細節。在10月28日的記者會中，有記者問柯文哲，葛特曼的書中提到曾經給他看過草稿，他有沒有看過？柯文哲說，這個訪問應該有錄音，至於葛特曼有寄草稿給他看，他就不敢講了，但最起碼會跟書上的內容不一樣。他還說作者吹牛吹過頭了，穿鑿附會。10月29日，柯文哲競選總部發出四點聲明。聲明強調，第一，柯文哲是在台大醫院外科加護病房服務，實際負責的是移植病患的術後照顧，根本沒有執行器官移植手術；第二、柯文哲強調，他接受作者訪談時，曾詳細探討中國大陸器官來源不明的問題，也多次呼籲各界應正視此問題；但書中所述「與大陸官員接洽」或「購買器官」的部分，絕非他本人。第三，當時接受訪談時有現場錄音，請作者詳查當時錄音內容，便可確認書中講述情節與他實際說話內容有極大落差。第四，柯文哲強調，他已正式委請律師發函該作者，要求更正。律師函強調柯文哲從未說過自己親自到中國大陸從事法輪功學員器官買賣，要求葛特曼三個星期內更正。

葛特曼透過器官移植關懷協會副理事長黃士維提出三點聲明。首先，葛特曼沒有講柯文哲仲介器官買賣，可能是英文解讀不同所致。其次，葛特曼已收到柯辦律師函並表示選後會與柯文哲討論如何修改書籍內容。最後，葛特曼肯定柯文哲有道德勇氣，願討論中共有使用法輪功成員器官進行移植手術，同時也呼籲各界應關注強摘法輪功成員器官事件。

11月7日，對手連勝文在電視辯論會中再度指控柯文哲， 柯拿出葛特曼律師11月4日的回函反駁，回函表示，葛特曼先生不認為柯醫師是個器官的仲介者，台灣某些媒體對他本人和柯醫師的攻擊都是不負責任、不道德的、不準確的。

11月27日，柯文哲辦公室公布葛特曼律師的正式回函。回函稱他們已經詳細檢視書中有關內容以及訪談記錄，再次強調他們認為語言與文化的差異造成了一些誤解，英語讀者不會把柯文哲當成是一個器官中介者，中文翻譯版本將力求準確，並在序言中回應柯文哲的疑慮。信中再次稱讚柯文哲行為高尚，他對於揭露目前仍在中國進行的醫療犯罪行為有著重大國際級的貢獻。

在2014年台北市長選舉中，柯文哲一直穩定領先對手，這一爭議事件對他的民調並沒有造成明顯負面影響。11月29日，柯文哲以得票率57%當選台北市長。

柯文哲當選台北市長之後的發展

12月19日，在太陽花學運後由左翼青年創立的《破土》（New Bloom）網絡雜誌上，柯文哲的支持者高銘佑發表《柯文哲到底是怎麼涉入中國器官買賣的？》一文。高銘佑注意到葛特曼的律師函中並沒有涉及書的內容，也沒有撤回任何內容，故可以合理推斷葛特曼堅持書中的描述，包括256頁這一段：

柯醫師去了中國，認真仔細地和他的同業們按表操課搏感情：喝到掛的盛宴、卡拉OK、白蘭地加茅台酒、微妙的恭維和對他腔調的調侃。當儀式真正告一段落，每個人的酒都醒了，中國外科醫師找他說話：

「你是我們的一份子。你是我們的兄弟。我們算你家庭價。但我們還會幫你做更多。我們注意到你很擔心器官的品質。我們也信任你的判斷力。所以你不用擔心你的病人，他們只會得到最好的：所有的器官都會來自法輪功。」

柯醫師微笑，客氣地感謝他們，移植過程開始。

12月22日，葛特曼在高銘佑這篇文章後面貼出一個連結，指向其網站的一個頁面，上有一段訪談錄影及文字問答，說明其立場，並提供相關證據下載。供下載的資料包括葛特曼助手林理善(Leeshai Lemish)與柯文哲電子郵件溝通，雙方往來律師函以及《屠宰》一書相關內容掃描件。根據這些材料，林理善在2013年6月12日給柯文哲發電子郵件，說葛特曼正在寫一篇關於中國大陸醫生黃潔夫的文章，作為比較，柯文哲在以前採訪中說的事情也會被納入其中，並問柯文哲：1.在不暴露其名字和身份的情況下，這些內容可不可以寫？2.所寫故事是否如實，是否準確，如果不是，該如何修改？在電子郵件之後附有葛特曼的文章的部分內容，文字與後來書中的文字基本相同。柯文哲回覆：故事看起來可以（The story seems Ok）。2014年1月9日，林理善再次給柯文哲發電子郵件，告知葛特曼的書已經進入最後階段，8月會出版，並問，柯以前以匿名方式出現，這次是否可以具名以增加可信度？並稱書中可以說柯不願意接受媒體採訪，但可能在國會或者議會作證。柯文哲回：好，我說的，我會負責（Ok，for what I say，I can be responsible）。得到這個答覆之後，林理善還向柯文哲要了一張柯本人的照片供書籍出版之用。葛特曼公布的這些材料證明柯文哲在《屠宰》出版之前知悉、確認並允許有關內容公開出版。

2014年12月23日，大紀元記者Matthew Robertson在大紀元英文網站轉帖了葛特曼網站上的問答，並說明這些問題本是台灣一家英文報紙提出的，但這家媒體最後不知何故放棄了對他採訪。12月26日，蘋果日報日報記者何哲欣對葛特曼網站的內容進行報道，但卻歪曲葛特曼的本意，說柯文哲講的是其他台灣醫生的事情，並非柯本人。12月27日，大紀元台灣版也對葛特曼網站的內容進行報道，但卻刻意略過葛特曼公布的主要證據。到目前為止，台灣其它媒體幾乎沒有報道。

12月19日黃潔夫在參訪高雄長庚醫院時表示中國大陸2015年起禁用死囚器官，並期盼能與台灣合作，建立器官移植平台，讓大陸器官合法輸台。但此議被衛生福利部所拒。同日晚間，柯文哲說黃潔夫在兩三天之前有來辦公室找他，談了約半小時。12月25日，柯文哲正式就任台北市市長。當天，針對一〇一大樓前法輪功學員與愛國同心會成員的衝突，柯文哲當眾警告信義警分局局長李德威：如果再有法輪功被打，就把你換掉！對葛特曼提供的證據，柯文哲目前沒有任何回應。

葛特曼網站公布的主要資料

葛特曼助理林理善2013年6月12日致柯文哲電子郵件及柯文哲回復

主旨：Dear Dr. Ko

Dr. Ko, 您好！

還記得我嗎？2008年和美國記者一起跟你見了面，去年我們還通了電話。您最近好嗎？我前幾個月還去了台北，應該找機會拜訪您。對不起，失禮了！

有事要問您。這幾年，那位作者一直很活躍，在揭露活摘器官這方面可以說是世界最突出的專家之一。您可能有聽說，國際社會上也有些進展。面對大陸的所謂「器官手術旅遊」（organ transplant tourism）個別國家也在考慮更嚴格的法律。那麼，這位作者是靠不同的採訪（包括更在大陸曾經做過這些事情的警察）來調查，寫文章，這這些事情暴光。給國際社會壓力也好，做個歷史記載也好，這是他的使命。

這幾天他在寫一片關於黃潔夫的文章。很可能在大陸當過活摘器官主力的黃潔夫正在海外得到獎勵和榮耀。為了做一個對比和講清楚這件事，作者想提您當時跟我們說的一些想法。所以我們想問您兩個問題。

1。在不提您的名字、具體情況或任何細節的情況下，可不可以寫這個內容？

2。他寫的故事的這個初稿（在下面）有沒有靠近現實？有沒有根據？因為當時我們沒有錄音，也沒有往這方面問您太多，所以有點情況我們不太清楚，只是記得大概方向。您可不可以看一眼，告訴我們這個故事哪裡有不太準的地方？要是不對，因該怎麼說才對了？

對不起，勞您這事。又是英語，他的表達方法（比如，「soup-to-nuts」=自始至終）有時候我也不一定馬上理解。但是我知道這件事情對您來說也很重要，才敢麻煩您了。

您也可以隨時跟我聯繫。美國號碼：（略）

非常感謝您。我們繼續努力！

祝您端午節快樂！

林理善

（Leeshai Lemish）

A Tale of two Surgeons

Just over a decade ago, a young Taiwanese surgeon began thinking about going to the mainland to acquire humane organs. It wasn’t a pleasant decision, he thought of himself as a conscientious man, not a gambler. But the waiting period for a liver or even a kidney in Taiwan could be as long as two or three years, by which time many of his patients would simply waste away. And if Chinese hospitals could perform the soup-to-nuts services they claimed on the web—donor to order, surgery, observation, recovery—patients who could barely be loaded onto a plane might come back as human beings who had successfully digested their airline meal, weren’t sure they actually needed the wheelchair, and tearfully hugged their waiting grandchildren. Taiwan was a death sentence for these patients: Mainland Chinese hospitals were blatantly advertising a tissue matched organ within a week or perhaps two.

He didn’t particularly want to look behind the Mainland curtain that’s all. You could do anything you liked in China. Cut someone’s dick off if you liked. Not that much difference from what he was trying to do; it was common knowledge that the organs were being taken from executed prisoners on death row.

So if his job was to ride his fragile patients into the wild, wild east and bring them back alive, okay, but even that wasn’t certain; the criminal life-style led to high probability of hepatitis, drug-use, or promiscuous sex. Labour camp led to stress and malnutrition. Any or perhaps all of these medical histories would now be given a second life in his patients』 bodies. And there was no recourse if something went wrong , not in a highly competitive, entrepreneurial business that operated in a not-quite-black market but a very, very gray one. Nor were his patients in any sense rich. Taiwan was still an emerging tiger, his patients had lived interesting lives to be sure, but modest ones. A glance at the web established the foreigner price of 63,000 US for a kidney. Because Chinese regarded the Taiwanese as slick foreigners wearing a Chinese mask that would be his price too, and yet native Chinese were paying half that. This injustice gnawed at him. Somehow, where so many Taiwanese businessmen before him had failed, he would have to convince the Mainland doctors he was not foreign devil but a brother.

The surgeon went to China and meticulously worked through the checklist of intimacy with his medical colleagues: The go-to-hell banquet. The karaoke bar. The cognac followed by the Mao-Tai. The subtle flattery and the jokes about his accent. And when the ritual was truly finished, the Chinese surgeons summoned him.

You are one of us. You are a brother. So we will give you the family price. But we are going to do more for you than that. We’ve noted your worries and concerns about organ quality. And we trust your discretion. So you will have no worries for your patients. They will receive nothing but the best: all the organs will come from Falun Gong. These people may be a little fanatical, but you know? They don’t drink. They don’t smoke. Many of them are young. They practice healthy Chi-gong. Very soon your patients—they will be young and healthy too.

And the surgeon smiled and thanked them politely, and the process began. But at the point of victory, he had felt no relief, only something that gnawed at him worse than before. Something he could not speak of.

Even as he set up appointments for his patients on the Mainland, the surgeon kept thinking that there must be a way to rationalize the system to apply some oversight, some sort of technical fix. Yet now that the doctors had blood on their hands there was no obvious way to medical reform. An open discussion would require dredging up the past. The Party would never allow the slaughter of prisoners of conscience to be revealed to the world—in fact his Chinese surgeon friends had already let him know discreetly that the harvesting of Falun Gong would be put in hold as the Olympics approached. When it was over—they would do it again. Perhaps the way forward was to use that brief hiatus as an opening to implement good bureaucratic hygiene, something to raise the cost of keeping secrets?

There was plenty of talk about consent forms—making the prisoner sign a release donating his organ to the nation 「as a final penance」 or something like that. But the surgeon knew the labor camp administrations could get anyone to sign anything. Reform had to start with the doctors』 conscience. On his own time, the surgeon labored to create a national database system, a mandatory electronic form. For every organ acquired, a doctor would have to fill in details on individual donor health, medical background, blood type, address, arrest record, everything. The form just had to be simple, non-threatening, and mainland-user-friendly—something even a barefoot doctor could use. Maybe he could sell the system to the Chinese medical establishment, even make some sort of compensation, and yet—that gnaw again—even if the mainland doctors adopted the system, you would only remove 95% of the problem. It was sickening.

Anyway they rejected it. It was obvious in retrospect that it was okay for the mainland doctors to run a sort of informal ebay of organ trading, done through emails, and discrete usergroups, but the surgeon’s form would either cut out too many potential donor or leave too much of an electronic trail. The rejection was passed on with the respect you give to a distant cousin who doesn’t quite get it. A few years later the surgeon gave an anonymous interview to an American writer—well, we thought it was anonymous anyway—and the surgeon was banned from the mainland for life.

It was during that same period, just short of 2006, that a Chinese doctor named Huang Jiefu was developing a reputation, save one, he was a very prolific transplant surgeon—if we have some understanding of what was in the Taiwanese surgeon’s heart, we know little of Huang Jiefu’s—in fact, that’s one of the unsolved mysteries of this article. But we do know, by Huang’s own admission, that he averaged over 100 liver transplants a year...

柯文哲2013年6月12日回覆：

the story seems Ok.

Dr. Wen-je Ko（柯文哲）

senior staff，SICU，Department of Surgery

chairman，Department of Traumatology

National Taiwan University Hospital

Taipei，Taiwan

葛特曼助理林理善2014年1月9日致柯文哲電子郵件及柯文哲回復

主旨： Dr. Ko, a question

Dear Dr. Ko,

Happy New Year! I hope this email finds you well.

Ethan Gutmann is in the final stages of completing his book. I don’t know if you saw - it is scheduled to come out in August and has already sold some advance orders on Amazon:

(Amazon公司的一個連結，不易辨識，略)

We wanted to ask you if you would be willing to give us permission to use your name when mentioning the things you told us. In the past, we just referred to you as 「anonymous Taiwan doctor」, but it is much more credible with a name. This will help the evidence.

You would be doing a great service, maybe even help save some people’s lives. We can put in the book that you do not wish to do media interview, except for maybe you would be willing to testify before Congress or Parliament, if that is the case.

Please think about it and let us know. We hope you will be okay with having your name used. We believe it will be very helpful.

您可以隨時跟我聯繫，美國號碼：**********

非常感謝您，

With best wishes to you,

林理善

(Leeshai Lemish)

柯文哲回覆：

OK

for what I say， I can be responsible.

Dr. Wen-je Ko（柯文哲）

senior staff，SICU，Department of Surgery

chairman，Department of Traumatology

National Taiwan University Hospital

Taipei，Taiwan

柯文哲的律師2014年10月28日致葛特曼函

TO: Mr. Ethan Gutmann

Oct. 28, 2014

RE: The Slaughter

I am a lawyer practicing law in Taiwan. In a recent book Entitled 「The Slaughter」 published recently mentions that Dr. Ko Wen-Je was involved in organ transplant purchased from mainland China. More importantly, in page 255 you mentioned that 「All the organs will come from Falun Gong」. On behalf of Dr. Ko, I would like you to clarify that Dr. Ko had never mentioned to contact with mainland China officials to purchase organ from mainland China himself.

I would be gratified that you can recheck your tape recording to check and identify that the content of interview is different from the content mentioned in your above mentioned book. After your doing that, I will request you to correct these parts which are not done by Dr. Ko, especially the contact with mainland China officials about purchase of organs, not to mention that these organs are from Falun Gong.

Your correction of the said content is hereby requested in three weeks.

Regards

Sincerely yours,

HSIU HUI YUAN

葛特曼的律師2014年11月4日回函

回覆：您10月28日給葛特曼先生的信函

親愛的Hsiu先生：

我們告知收到你的來函。

首先，我要明確聲明葛特曼先生對柯醫師有最高的敬意，他不認為他是器官仲介。

葛特曼先生認為，台灣某些特定媒體對他本人與柯醫師的攻擊是不負責，違反道德，不準確的。同時，葛特曼先生知道台北正在舉行選舉，這讓事情變得更為複雜，可能也加劇台灣媒體不負責任的程度。

根據之前我們達成的協議，我們會在三周內針對你們來函提出的問題做完整回覆，請以本信作為這項承諾的確認。

克萊夫 安世立
敬上
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Your letter to Mr Gutmann on October 28, Last

Dear Mr.Hsiu：

We acknowledge receipt of the captioned letter.

At the outset, I would like to make clear that Mr Gutmann has the utmost respect for Dr.Ko and does not consider him to be an organ broker.

Mr.Gutmann considers the attacks on both himself and Dr.Ko by elements of the Taiwan press to be irresponsible, unethical, and inaccurate. At the same time , Mr.Gutmann recognizes that there is an election in progress in Taipei and that this complicates things and perhaps serves to exacerbate the irresponsibility of the Taiwan press.

Please accept this letter as our confirmation that we shall provide a fuller response to the issues raised in your letter within the three week time period upon which we have agreed.

Yours Truly
Clive Ansley

葛特曼的律師2014年11月25日回函

回覆：您10月給葛特曼先生的信函

請諒解我們的回應時間，超過了您當初於十一月四號信中，我們所承諾的三週期限數日。

我們對於柯醫師的疑慮非常認真地看待，且我們已經詳閱所有書中相關頁面並檢視當時撰寫依據的面談紀錄與文件。

我們認為，在台灣媒體上全面性的誤解與魯莽的指控，是因為Gutmann書中的英文與相關頁面被翻譯成中文過後，因為語言與文化的差異所造成的理解問題。

我們相信所有的誤解都會在中文版的The Slaughter中被澄清，其中會包含未收錄在英文版中的序言，會直接回應柯文哲醫師的疑慮。

為了讓事情更明朗，我們必須要指出，對於書中225頁的理解，完全沒有英語語系的評論家，有著跟第一語言是華語的台灣讀者有著相同解釋。 在您給Gutmann先生的信件中，您對於255頁的敘述「所有器官都是來自於法輪功」有特別的疑慮。

這本書有透過三位專業讀者同儕審查，且經Prometheus冗長的內部編輯過程，不僅包含文字內容，更須檢視作者的筆記、訪談的錄音帶以及電子溝通。

沒有任何英語系的讀者會將標題或是文字內容解讀為，柯文哲可從類似私人「器官仲介」交易的形式取得法輪功器官，只會解讀為柯文哲醫師是被告知資訊的。

迄今沒有任何英語系讀者曾經將柯文哲醫師解讀為器官仲介者。

迄今也沒有任何英語系讀者相信，柯文哲醫師曾試圖自行購買器官或是以任何形式參與營利行為。

相反地，多數讀者讚揚柯醫師對於調查的貢獻。審查人員們均一致地如此回應，就像是觀眾們在華盛頓特區National Endowment for Democracy中舉辦的The Slaughter書本發表會的反應一樣。

我們相信語言、翻譯以及在台北市市長選舉中激昂的政治環境，會導致大家誤會作者的意思並讓事情變得更模糊。

然而我們將全力確保在中文版的The Slaughter會越準確越好。

總而言之，我們重申我們認為台灣媒體對於柯文哲醫師以及Gutmann先生的對待是不公平的。Gutmann先生相信且我們認為他的書所闡述的是，柯文哲醫師的舉止高尚，柯文哲醫師從來不曾執行器官仲介，他也從來不曾透過中國器官市場進行獲利，且他對於揭露目前仍在中國進行的醫療犯罪行為有著重大國際級的貢獻，柯文哲醫師的行為是令人驕傲的。

克萊夫 安世立
敬上
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Your Letter to Mr. Gutmann on October

Please excuse us for having exceeded by a few days the three week time period within which we had agreed to expand upon our earlier letter to you of November 4.

We take Dr. Ko's concerns very seriously and we have reviewed the relevant pages in his book together with our own records of interviews and notes on which those pages were based.

We have concluded that the entire misunderstanding and the reckless accusations which have appeared in the Taiwan media would appear to be based on language and cultural differences between the English in Mr. Gutmann's book, on the one hand, and the understanding of the relevant pages when the latter have been rendered into Chinese.

We believe that all misunderstandings will be clarified in the Chinese edition of The Slaughter, which will contain a special preface not included in the English edition. This preface will address Dr. Ko's concerns directly.

For greater clarity, we would like to point out that no English speaking reviewer of the book has understood page 255 in the way it has apparently been understood in Taiwan by readers whose first language is Chinese.

In your letter to Mr. Gutmann, you specifically mentioned the caption on page 255 reading "All the Organs will come from Falun Gong" as a particular concern.

This book was peer-reviewed by three expert readers and subjected to a lengthy internal editing process by Prometheus. This review included not only the text itself, but also the author's notes, interview tapes, and electronic communications.

No English-speaking reader has understood the caption or the text to mean anything other than that Dr. Ko was being given information, rather than making a statement about the availability of Falun Gong organs in some sort of personal "organ broker" deal.

No English-speaking reader to date has understood for one moment that Dr. Ko was acting as an "organ broker".

No English-speaking reader to date believes that Dr. Ko was trying to purchase organs himself or was in any way involved in any sort of profit-making venture.

On the contrary, most readers have praised Dr. Ko for his contribution to the investigation. Reviewers have responded similarly, as did the audience at the author's book launch at the National Endowment for Democracy in Washington DC.

We believe that language, translation, and the heated environment of the political campaign for the mayoral race in Taipei may be playing a role in misconstruing the author's intentions and clouding the issue.

Nonetheless we are interested in ensuring that the Chinese edition of The Slaughter is as accurate as possible. In conclusion, we reiterate that we think the Taiwan media has been unfair in its treatment of both Dr. Ko and Mr. Gutmann. Mr. Gutmann believes, and we think his book demonstrates, that Dr. Ko has acted honourably, that he has never been an organ broker, that he has never sought profit through China's organ marketing, and that he has contributed significantly to the international effort to expose the medical crimes which continue to be perpetrated in China.

Yours Truly
Clive Ansley

外部連結

葛特曼网站. 

註釋

Category:2014年台灣選舉 Category:法輪功 Category:器官移植