編者按：2007年8月9日，加拿大主流媒體《渥太華公民報(bào)》發(fā)表文章，對(duì)前加拿大下院議員大衛(wèi)·基爾格的所謂法輪功受迫害的報(bào)告提出了質(zhì)疑，并稱(chēng)為“蘇家屯故事”。文章主要內(nèi)容如下。
渥太華公民報(bào) 格蘭.麥克喬治 2007年8月9日
基爾格先生曾經(jīng)是加拿大政府負(fù)責(zé)亞太地區(qū)事務(wù)的部長(zhǎng)，長(zhǎng)期鼓吹人權(quán)。2005年，當(dāng)他還是無(wú)黨派的下院議員時(shí)，曾威脅時(shí)任加拿大總理保羅·馬丁，如果加拿大不對(duì)蘇丹達(dá)爾富爾地區(qū)提供更多的幫助的話(huà)，他將撤銷(xiāo)對(duì)馬丁有限政府政策的支持。
基爾格先生去年與溫尼伯湖的律師大衛(wèi)·麥塔斯合著的一份關(guān)于法輪功受迫害的報(bào)告引起了國(guó)際關(guān)注。
和以前的報(bào)告不一樣的是，這份麥塔斯—基爾格報(bào)告完全信任“法輪功”的判斷和主張。今天，它的結(jié)論還經(jīng)常被反華運(yùn)動(dòng)的信徒當(dāng)作對(duì)中國(guó)政府指控的證據(jù)拿來(lái)引用。
然而，當(dāng)他們的很多工作被國(guó)際人權(quán)專(zhuān)家所信奉的時(shí)候，一些人也對(duì)報(bào)告的某些內(nèi)容和它的方法論提出了質(zhì)疑。
中國(guó)駐渥太華大使館批評(píng)報(bào)告是“毫無(wú)根據(jù)的”、是“建立在謠言和錯(cuò)誤判斷基礎(chǔ)之上的?！?/p>
但是報(bào)告的其他部分仍然是可疑的，美國(guó)國(guó)會(huì)研究人員認(rèn)為報(bào)告中的一些關(guān)鍵主張“似乎與其他的調(diào)查發(fā)現(xiàn)互相矛盾?！?/p>
報(bào)告的中間部分聲稱(chēng)中國(guó)政府摘取“法輪功”練習(xí)者的器官賣(mài)給外國(guó)游客?！胺ㄝ喒Α敝С终叱錆M(mǎn)感情地說(shuō)中國(guó)政府在“法輪功”練習(xí)者被囚禁或處死的地方用簡(jiǎn)單的工具摘走了他們的器官，并將尸體燒掉。
2006年3月，一個(gè)所謂在中國(guó)東北有“集中營(yíng)”的故事被大紀(jì)元時(shí)報(bào)報(bào)道出來(lái)。大紀(jì)元時(shí)報(bào)是專(zhuān)門(mén)刊載關(guān)于“法輪功”受迫害的、充滿(mǎn)敵意的反共評(píng)論和故事的報(bào)紙。這份報(bào)紙聲稱(chēng)在蘇家屯秘密集中營(yíng)里4500名法輪功追隨者被處死并被燒掉。
主流媒體很快開(kāi)始報(bào)道這個(gè)故事。國(guó)家評(píng)論在線(xiàn)，美國(guó)的一個(gè)保守網(wǎng)站寫(xiě)道：“中國(guó)人權(quán)運(yùn)動(dòng)人士相信這個(gè)地名能夠引起像特雷布林卡或其它什么名字一樣的戰(zhàn)栗。”多倫多太陽(yáng)報(bào)將蘇家屯和納粹集中營(yíng)進(jìn)行了簡(jiǎn)單的比較。
基爾格先生和麥塔斯先生被總部設(shè)在美國(guó)的“法輪功受迫害真相聯(lián)合調(diào)查團(tuán)”邀請(qǐng)去中國(guó)做關(guān)于中國(guó)侵犯人權(quán)的調(diào)查。他們沒(méi)能進(jìn)入中國(guó)境內(nèi)，卻通過(guò)文獻(xiàn)和采訪(fǎng)來(lái)工作。7月，他們發(fā)表了一份報(bào)告，結(jié)論是中國(guó)“處死了一大批但是不祥的法輪功良心犯?！?/p>
作者強(qiáng)調(diào)他們沒(méi)有任何證據(jù)可以證明他們的結(jié)論，但是他們找到了由一位以假名安妮居住在美國(guó)的婦女講述的“可信”的故事，這名婦女聲稱(chēng)在中國(guó)時(shí)曾是一位外科醫(yī)生的妻子。
安妮，這個(gè)以前曾在大紀(jì)元時(shí)報(bào)的故事中出現(xiàn)的女人告訴加拿大人，她的丈夫曾經(jīng)在蘇家屯從大約2000名“法輪功”練習(xí)者的身上摘取了眼角膜。她說(shuō)，之后，身體被送到其他醫(yī)生那里摘取更多的器官，然后，遺體就被燒掉了。麥塔斯先生和基爾格先生寫(xiě)到，他們只是在用其他信息來(lái)證實(shí)安妮所提供的消息。
報(bào)告還依靠翻譯過(guò)來(lái)的電話(huà)記錄做為證據(jù)，這些紀(jì)錄被說(shuō)成是中國(guó)官員確認(rèn)從“法輪功”被拘留者身上摘取器官。
隨著報(bào)道發(fā)表，對(duì)“蘇家屯事件”真實(shí)性的懷疑也在增加。
美國(guó)務(wù)院稱(chēng)美國(guó)駐沈陽(yáng)領(lǐng)事館和駐北京大使館的官員曾兩次被邀請(qǐng)去蘇家屯，但是他們只發(fā)現(xiàn)了“一個(gè)普通的公共醫(yī)院”。
香港媒體的記者也沒(méi)有發(fā)現(xiàn)任何“法輪功”追隨者所謂的“地下死亡集中營(yíng)”，他們證實(shí)，所謂焚燒尸體的設(shè)施其實(shí)就是一個(gè)鍋爐房。
當(dāng)一個(gè)聲明反對(duì)共產(chǎn)主義中國(guó)政府的前政治犯吳宏達(dá)質(zhì)疑蘇家屯事件所用的證據(jù)時(shí)，蘇家屯故事變得更加不可信。他的組織調(diào)查發(fā)現(xiàn)這些證據(jù)都是“不可靠的”。他認(rèn)為這個(gè)事件“可能是被故意捏造出來(lái)的”。
對(duì)麥塔斯—基爾格報(bào)告的質(zhì)疑已經(jīng)超出了對(duì)蘇家屯事件的質(zhì)疑。一份由美國(guó)國(guó)會(huì)研究機(jī)構(gòu)起草的報(bào)告認(rèn)為，麥塔斯—基爾格報(bào)告的大部分“并沒(méi)有提出新的或獨(dú)立獲得的證據(jù)，很大程度上是依賴(lài)于邏輯推理?！蓖瑫r(shí)，也質(zhì)疑電話(huà)記錄，這些紀(jì)錄被說(shuō)成是中國(guó)官員證實(shí)從“法輪功”被拘留者身上摘取器官。
研究機(jī)構(gòu)的報(bào)告認(rèn)為：“一些人認(rèn)為如此明顯的證據(jù)似乎不太會(huì)被得到，因?yàn)檫@些敏感信息是由中國(guó)政府控制的，由此產(chǎn)生對(duì)電話(huà)記錄可靠性的質(zhì)疑”。
今年1月份，麥塔斯先生和基爾格先生發(fā)表了報(bào)告的更新版，重申他們相信那位匿名的外科醫(yī)生前妻的話(huà)。他們聲稱(chēng)，吳先生關(guān)于蘇家屯事件的結(jié)論是在調(diào)查團(tuán)沒(méi)有完成工作之前就匆忙得出的。
“也就是說(shuō)吳先生的觀點(diǎn)不是依據(jù)他完整的調(diào)查報(bào)告而得出的?！彼麄儚?qiáng)調(diào)。
吳先生組織的一位女發(fā)言人本周卻表示，吳先生沒(méi)有改變?cè)谔K家屯事件上的立場(chǎng)。
勞改研究基金會(huì)的麗莎.坡特索說(shuō)：“我們沒(méi)有發(fā)現(xiàn)任何證據(jù)可以證實(shí)他們所描述的地點(diǎn)、數(shù)字和事件。”
麥塔斯先生說(shuō)如果將他所說(shuō)的認(rèn)為是基于將大紀(jì)元時(shí)報(bào)中提到的集中營(yíng)和醫(yī)院等信息的一種錯(cuò)誤混合，那么可能會(huì)對(duì)蘇家屯事件的認(rèn)識(shí)產(chǎn)生偏差。他表示，他仍然相信那位外科醫(yī)生前妻所說(shuō)的話(huà)。
英文原文：
The Ottawa Citizen questions 'The story of Sujiatun'
Mr. Kilgour, who once served as secretary of state for the Asia-Pacific region, has a long record as a human rights advocate. In 2005, when sitting as an independent MP, he threatened to withdraw support for then-prime minister Paul Martin's narrow minority government if Canada did not do more to help the people of Darfur, in the Sudan.
Mr. Kilgour made international headlines last year with a report on the persecution of Falun Gong, co-written with Winnipeg lawyer David Matas.
Like no other document before it, the Matas-Kilgour report gave credence to allegations advanced by Falun Gong. Today, its conclusions are regularly cited by the movement's devotees as evidence of abuse at the hands of the Chinese government.
And while much of their work has been embraced by international human rights experts, some have raised doubts about some aspects of the report and its methodology.
The Chinese Embassy in Ottawa dismissed it as "groundless" and "based on rumours and false allegations."
But others were also dubious. Researchers working for the U.S. Congress concluded that some of the key allegations in the report "appear to be inconsistent with the findings of other investigations."
At the centre of the report is the claim that the Chinese government harvests the organs of Falun Gong practitioners for sale to foreign tourists. Falun supporters have charged that the Chinese government operated a facility where practitioners were imprisoned, executed, their organs removed and their bodies cremated.
The stories of an alleged concentration camp in northeastern China first surfaced in March 2006 with reports in the Epoch Times, a newspaper that publishes virulently anti-Communist commentary and stories alleging persecution of the Falun Gong movement. The paper cited a secret concentration camp at Sujiatun where, it alleged, 4,500 followers had been executed and cremated.
The mainstream media soon jumped on the story. The National Review Online, a conservative website in the U.S., wrote that Chinese human-rights activists believe that this name should cause the same shudders as Treblinka and the others. The Toronto Sun made the easy comparison between the Sujiatun claims and Nazi death camps.
Mr. Kilgour and Mr. Matas were asked by a U.S.-based group called the Coalition to Investigate the Persecution of the Falun Gong in China to look into the allegations of human rights violations. They were not allowed into China, but worked from documents and interviews. In July, they issued a report that concluded China had put to death a large but unknown number of Falun Gong prisoners of conscience.
Although the authors stress that they did not rely on any one piece of evidence to reach their conclusion, they said they found credible the story of an unnamed woman living in the U.S. with the pseudonym Annie, who claimed to be the former wife of a surgeon in China.
Annie, previously featured in an Epoch Times story, told the Canadians that her husband had removed the corneas from approximately 2,000 Falun Gong prisoners at Sujiatun. The bodies were passed on to other doctors who removed more organs, and then cremated the remains, she claimed. Mr. Matas and Mr. Kilgour used her information only where it could be corroborated by other information, they wrote.
The report also relied on translated transcripts of telephone calls in which Chinese officials were said to confirm the common harvesting of organs from Falun Gong detainees.
By the time the report was released, doubts about the veracity of the Sujiatun story were growing.
The U.S. State Department said officials from its consulate in nearby Shenyang City and the embassy in Beijing had visited Sujiatun twice and found only a normal public hospital.
Reporters from a Hong Kong newspaper also found no sign of an underground death camp that Falun followers alleged. A machine that was said to be an oven for cremating bodies was, in fact, a boiler room, they concluded.
The Sujiatun story lost more air when Harry Wu, a former political prisoner of the Chinese government and outspoken voice against the Communist government, said he doubted the witness accounts upon which the Sujiatun stories relied. His organization investigated and found the witness statements unreliable. He concluded the story may be intentionally fabricated.
While Mr. Wu agreed that the Chinese government brutally persecutes the Falun Gong and others, he said there was no evidence to support the claim that 4,500 practitioners were killed at Sujiatun.
Questions about the Matas-Kilgour report went beyond the allegations about Sujiatun. A paper prepared by the U.S. Congressional Research Service concluded that the report for the most part "does not bring forth new or independently-obtained testimony and relies largely upon the making of logical inferences." It also questioned the transcripts of telephone calls, in which Chinese officials are said to admit using Falun Gong organs.
"Some argue that such apparent candour would seem unlikely given Chinese government controls over sensitive information, which may raise questions about the credibility of the telephone recordings," the research service paper said.
In January, Mr. Matas and Mr. Kilgour released an updated version of their report and repeated their belief in the story of the unnamed former wife of a surgeon. Mr. Wu had jumped to conclusions about Sujiatun before investigators from his organization completed their work, they claimed.
"What this means is that the views of Harry Wu were not based on the full reports of his investigation," the report claimed.
A spokeswoman for Mr. Wu's organization said this week he has not changed his position on the Sujiatun allegations.
"We haven't found any evidence to support the location and the number and events they have described going on," said Lisa Pertoso, of the Laogai Research Foundation.
Still, by most accounts, there had been a marked rise in the number of organs available for transplantation in China. The government has acknowledged that some organs may come from prisoners, but it claims the condemned agree to donation before their executions.
Some of the executed could be political prisoners or Falun Gong followers, of course. But China vehemently denies an orchestrated genocide or use of Nazi-style concentration camps involving Falun Gong. The government also moved last year to prohibit the sale of organs.
Mr. Matas says there may have been some confusion over Sujiatun based on what he says was a mistaken blending of information about a prison camp and a hospital in one of the Epoch Times stories. He says he continues to believe what the surgeon's ex-wife told him.
(The Ottawa Citizen Published Thursday, August 09, 2007)