Organ Donation is proof you can scam an honest person

The other day I had a call from an Indian sounding lady who told me she was calling me on behalf of Tesco’s and Morrison’s supermarkets to tell me I’d won a £60 shopping voucher. Knowing that I had not entered any competition to receive this, my instincts told me this was a scam, and I told the woman so and hung up.

They say you can’t scam an honest person, but if I had been brought up to believe that beneficent corporations would ring me out of the blue to give me money, I might have been fooled. And so it is with organ donation. We have been lied to so completely, so comprehensively, for so long that the public actually believes absolute lies on the subject. Their ignorance is fostered deliberately in order to continue the scam – a criminal act against the people of this country! In fact of course, without our ignorance it could never take place at all.

person.jpg

This lady claims she has been told her baby will die when it is born, and so has decided to carry it to term to “donate its organs”. There is something very wrong with the whole story – I actually suspect it is a false or planted story (I hope so, because otherwise this woman has been deceived into allowing her child to be killed – vivisected – for its organs).

The story begins with an error:

A brave mother who’s unborn child has died in the womb will carry her baby to full term in order to donate their organs to another dying child.

Hayley Martin, 30, from Hull, East Yorkshire found out at her 20-week scan that her child will die during labour or within minutes of birth.

Ummm – which is it? Is it dead, or will it die at birth? Is this just sloppy journalism? I don’t know. Then more strangeness:

While doctors suggested she get a termination to avoid the trauma of birth, she has decided to take the pregnancy to term so their baby daughter’s organs can go to other newborns in desperate need of transplants. 

At 20 weeks it would be classed as a late-term abortion and would be “partial birth” – I don’t see how that is less traumatic! (Read: Abortion – the story that brought a class of teens to silence)

The article then says she will be induced “Christmas week” a month early (why on earth would you do that?!)

Then it gets very sad because this woman really does not know the truth about organ donation:

‘I also know there will be babies out there who could have a chance at life with Ava’s healthy organs. Why should two babies die if one can be saved?’

However, the stoic mother-of-three still gets upset when she thinks about losing her tot.

‘I try to be as honest as possible and have a rehearsed speech prepared, but at times I can’t help but to fall apart and cry – especially when strangers congratulate me in the supermarket or at the shops’ she said. 

The baby has to weigh a minimum of 5.5lbs to become an organ donor and the couple are still unsure about what their daughter will be able to donate, but think her heart valves, liver cells and pancreas are the likely candidates. 

Later in the article they promote the idea of starting a charity in their unborn daughter’s name:

The Martins are also planning on starting a charity project in Ava-Joy’s memory to help other families who decide to carry to term, despite a fatal diagnosis.

They want to raise awareness of fatal fetal conditions, and support families by creating ‘memory packs’ to help them capture every precious moment.

You can read the full story here: Link

Something doesn’t feel right about this article. The images of the sad-faced Mum are there – all too posed and perfect. I cannot imagine any mother wanting to share such a personal and painful decision before the day. It smacks of propaganda for the organ donation drive. I’ve written before about this here: Link

Either this is an absolutely tragic story, made worse by medical deception, or it’s a planted story to test, or garner the level of support there is to bring in a system which expects mothers to consider carrying children to term for their organs. Which, by the way is sick!

I’ll quote from my previous article linked above:

The fact is the debate has been opened – that is what the article was designed to do – to open the debate and get you thinking that this was a viable option, and to guage the public’s feelings on the issue.

This proposal will move forward unless we say a resounding no again and again. They have begun this with a debate in a national newspaper, next time the debate might be in parliament – will you even pay attention to the news to know about it? Will your MP do what you want, as your representative, if you do?

The public are being softened up for this to become policy at some point – when they’ve suggested it enough times, and you’ve stopped saying no.

Say NO to organ donation.

God Bless you

Lis

Advertisements

Deception and brutal force

In Africa they believe that albinos have magical power. They believe that in order for this power to be in the body parts, they must be cut off while the person is alive.

muti.jpg

What does this remind you of? Oh yes, organ donation. Except that we in the west declare them dead before we cut out their beating hearts and put them in other people’s bodies.

If Africa is backward, we are deceptive, devious and equally evil.

God says: “Thou shallt not kill”

Organ donation is little more than Aztec human sacrifice. It is little more than African muti – murder, theft, deception and evil beyond comprehension. Yet people continue to support organ donation through ignorance. They are deceived.

I am, as yet, to hear back from my MP, or Dan Jarvis MP regarding the emails I sent them.

God Bless you

Lis

My letter to my MP regarding organ donation opt out system

A note to you – would you please write to your MP and voice your concerns about this bill?

I wrote to my MP this morning, and thought I would share what I wrote to him with you.

Dear Mr Hancock,

I am writing to you with regard to a Private Members Bill which, I understand, is about to be presented in the House of Commons (according to this article: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/ health/article-4704718/My-new- lungs-don-t-work-more.html).

I have written urgently to Dan Jarvis MP, and now I am writing also to you, as my MP, to share my very great disquiet.

Informed consent is the basis for everything that is done in the way of treatment (and the withdrawal of treatment) within the NHS. However, no one has ever given informed consent to be an organ donor. Organ donation requires the donor to be alive when their organs are removed. They must still have full respiration, a beating heart etc. in order for their organs to be usable. There have been numerous cases of patients who heard doctors discuss the harvesting of their organs, and who regained consciousness and later fully recovered from their injuries. Those cases are chilling in themselves, but the plain matter of law is the matter of informed consent.

If the public do not understand that they will be alive, not cold and blue as they believe, when those organs are removed, then the continuation of the organ donor system as it stands now is based on deception!

I’ll give you an example that I also shared with Mr Jarvis:

I asked a couple of my friends whether they were on the organ donor register, and they both said no. I said to them, “Well don’t go on it.” They asked why, and I simply asked them ‘Would you like an anaesthetic when your organs are removed?” They said, “But why would I need one, I’d be dead?”

There you have the public’s understanding of organ donation in a nutshell.

Yet the government is now considering moving to an opt out system of presumed consent, which worse, not only denies most people who are ambivalent about the decision a choice, but will also ensure the continuation of the public’s ignorance of the facts of organ donation.

Let me reiterate – the public believe they will be dead in the common understanding of that word when their organs are removed. Doctors know that organs from the dead cannot be used, and so have invented new definitions of death in order to get these organs. How can this be anything other than deception, Mr Hancock?

I ask you to stand against this new bill, which I believe is a crime against the British people.

Yours sincerely

Mrs Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx

Having written to Dan Jarvis MP, and now Matthew Hancock MP, I will of course share any responses I recieve on this matter.

God Bless you

Lis

A useful little video about organ donation criteria

I put this short video together to give people an opportunity to hear Dr Paul Byrne speak on organ donation criteria. I’ve done this in response to the decision by Scotland to go for an opt out system for organ donation. I am getting into some arguments with folk about this – of course they will defend their ignorance on this subject, their precious ignorance, and I don’t say that to be cruel, because the truth is so abhorrent that I cannot really blame people for finding it unacceptable. They want to tell me I’m wrong, and insult me rather than even investigate the words of experts I have put before them. I can only do and say so much – but I do so to protect them and their loved ones from an abominable crime – murder.

Organ donation, whatever your religion, whatever your stance on medical ethics, is reliant on one thing, which no matter your political persuasion, is currently at fault. There is no informed consent.

This is a legal issue – no matter what else may colour your views on the matter. Without informed consent, organ theft is a crime. It cannot be a donation – and indeed once an opt out system is in place, it won’t be in anyones vocabulary any longer to refer to it as a donation! But without informed consent, it’s a crime, and in any case, as patients are alive when their organs are removed it is murder, plain and simple. Because of this, I cannot stay silent.

Please watch this and share it with everyone you know, and especially loved ones. If they know what’s involved their lives may be saved.

God Bless you

Lis