Zhang Hongbao in Blast Furnace
---- A documentary on how the outstanding spiritual leader transformed to a political leader
Back to Index >
This Is Not Just a Story about "the Coming of the Wolf"
By Wai Po
From New York Times Message Board
Most Chinese are familiar with the childhood story about "the coming of the wolf," which is intended to teach children about the danger of lying. Unfortunately, Jiang's government, representing one of the most important nations of the world, did not hesitate to lie to the world, in an attempt to forestall America's granting political asylum to Zhang Hongbao. The fabricated evidence produced by the Chinese government to back up its allegations about Zhang's crime of sexual assaults, however, has been invalidated at a judiciary inspection conducted by authoritative facilities of both the U.S. Congress and the State Department, and the authenticity of the "evidence" has also been ruled out by a judge of the U.S. immigration court in Hawaii. By lying to the world, the Jiang's government has brought shame to itself, disgraced the Chinese nation, and discredited itself before the upcoming generations of Chinese.
In a written judgment on Zhang Hongbao's political asylum case delivered on September 21, 1999, a judge of U.S. Immigration Court in Hawaii, Dana Diaz, commented in her evaluation of the evidence provided by the Chinese government:
According to the above law, political asylum should not be granted to any immigrant who has been determined by the Attorney General to be guilty of any criminal offence committed in another country prior to his or her entry into the United States. In the case of this respondent (Zhang Hongbao), there does not exist any evidence to prove that he committed any criminal offence.
Although some materials allege that the respondent committed criminal offences, there does not exist adequate evidence to prove the allegation. The interrogation materials produced by the Chinese government were not up to professional standards, for the conclusion was reached through subjective speculations of the interrogators, not based on any objective evidence or facts. Furthermore, the materials were put together hastily in a very short period of time, which makes the authenticity of the materials more doubtful. What is more, in 1994, when the respondent left China, why did the police fail to arrest him under the charge of sexual assaults? If the arrest order was issued in 1990 or 1991, the respondent could have been easily located and put under arrest. This court has not found any evidence that goes against the application for political asylum.
The State Department has also presented strong evidences to demonstrate that any item among those listed above will subject the respondent to persecution from the Chinese government. This court has not found any evidence about the respondent's having committed any felony prior to his entry into this country. As has been mentioned, the materials provided put forward that allegation that the respondent committed criminal offences, but there is "no sufficient evidence." Having inspected all the materials presented, this court has determined that there is "no enough evidence."
As a Chinese, how do you feel after reading the judicial assessment above?
If the evidences are provided by the Chinese government and handed over to the American authorities through the Chinese Embassy, how can it be possible that these evidences are not up to professional standards? Can the Chinese national judiciary standards be that low? Of course, fabricated evidences may create exceptions, for it is extremely difficult for something forged to be presented as "a seamless heavenly robe."
Who on the earth is deceiving the people? Who is not satisfied with cheating the domestic public and audacious enough to perform the farce on the international arena, in the Unites States? Is this farce going to become a classical international anecdote of "a robber acting like a cop"?
Back to Index >>
Print this article