Zhang Hongbao in Blast Furnace
---- A documentary on how the outstanding spiritual leader transformed to a political leader
Back to Index >
Question the Political case of Zhang Hongbao
From New York Times Message board:
In the past year, the case of Zhang Hongbao's political asylum application has become one of the focuses that draw close attention of the world.
After I thoroughly studied the case, I did find quite a lot of details questionable and hard to understand. Reading the article "Review and analysis of the complicated case of Zhang Hongbao's political asylum" by Guan Kai Cheng helped me to get the things into shape and also figure out some points dubious behind the screen. Since the final result is yet to come, now we could only question and list out those points for everybody's reference.
Question 1: After Zhang Hongbao reached the territory of the United States, the US government could have considered and answer him through political negotiation whether they could give his Zhong Gong organization humane support. But who is the person to have decided to file the case as Zhang Hongbao's personal asylum application, whereupon putting him into prison came within American jurisdiction.
Question 2: On June 13 of 2000, the court has decided to grant Zhang Hongbao political asylum, while the INS claimed that his fingerprints appraisal had been lost, wherefore the judge could not sign the document to approve his asylum. How did the fingerprint appraisal get lost? Was it really lost? Or did someone make the excuse to play for time so that Zhang Hongbao could be handed over to CPC?
Question 3: On one hand, the court had decided to grant Zhang Hongbao asylum. Who on the other hand ordered to bring the suit against him for a second time?
Question 4: Who is the person that let out the information regarding Zhang Hongbao's asylum application which was under processing to the Chinese Communist Party? With what purpose?
Question 5: Who is the person that has arranged media to spread the opinion that Zhang Hongbao might have committed crimes, by which to mislead the masses? What was the purpose of such misleading, which took place one week ahead of the date ---- July 28 that the court session was to reopen?
Question 6: Who had the letters to Zhang Hongbao that CPC withdrew submitted to the Court in illegal way?
Question 7: Who is the person to incite the INS to help CPC impose pressure on the court and have the already decided approval of political asylum changed to "relief from deportation" and "Anti-maltreatment Protection"?
Question 8: When the court commuted the political asylum approval to "Anti-maltreatment", who ordered to continue locking up Zhang Hongbao? For what? Why not make it clear? If it was because of the accusation by CPC, how do they explain now when those accusations are concluded not convincible by the two authorized departments ----- Human Rights Bureau of the State Department and the Legal Council of the Congress Library? Furthermore, accusation itself is not evidence according to the US Evidence Law. If it was not because of the accusation, then why did not Clinton's administration answer him whether to help or not when Zhang Hongbao asked for help on behalf of his Zhong Gong organization? Instead they put him into prison and tried every effort to convince him guilty. What on earth is the matter?
Question 9: Who was behind the scene requiring the court to extradite Zhang Hongbao to a third country? What is the purpose to do so? Is it because their plan to assist CPC to get Zhang Hongbao extradited back to China has exposed wherefore they came up with another idea to extradite him to a third country so that CPC could succeed in extraditing him back to China from the third country? Isn't it too wicked of them to do that?
Question 10: On June 13, INS withdrew the court decision to grant Zhang Hongbao asylum. Following that, in less than one week, the US and China signed the judicial agreement of extradition of criminals on June 19. Were there any links between? Was it a coincidence? Or did someone leak information to CPC and so the two sides hurried to sign the agreement by which they could extradite Zhang back to China with high-sounding excuses? If true, is that a kind of betray?
All the aforementioned took place during the term of Clinton. Many signs suggest that all these stories have had some certain links to Clinton. However, we have a saying in Chinese: "If you don't want others to know about it, don't do it." The truth will come to light sooner or later. We appeal that the Congress should thoroughly investigate this case.
Back to Index >
Print this article