Talking about "Petition to the City of New Haven Board of Aldermen"

Mr. Zheng Yeqing is a friend of mine and a JD student at Yale Law School.

Reminds me of an earlier article, "One Olympic Victory" on the Wall Street Journal's Opinion page (February 19, 2008), by Hollywood actress Mia Farrow and her son Ronan Farrow. Mr. Farrow is also a student at YLS. I respectfully disagree with the Farrows.

Quote

Petition to the City of New Haven Board of Aldermen

Dear Aldermen,

We are a group of Chinese students and scholars at Yale University. We are writing to apply for permission to host a public gathering of approximately 500 people in an appropriate public space on the afternoon of April 26^th, 2008.

It has recently been brought to our attention that the Board of Aldermen has approved street closure for a mock torch relay on April 26^th, 2008 to protest against China’s alleged human-rights violations. While we sincerely appreciate and share your concern with China's human rights conditions, we feel the responsibility to make our own voice heard as well—a voice which we believe represents the vast majority of the Chinese community in New Haven. Our peaceful gathering will aim to present a balanced picture of Chinese human rights conditions and to promote the Olympic spirit of unity, inclusiveness, and equality. This event is jointly organized by the students and scholars of Yale University and leaders of the local Chinese community.

We, overseas Chinese, perhaps care more than anyone else about human rights in China. Every human rights violation in China potentially affects our families and friends residing in China. Our deepest gratitude goes to the well-meaning Americans who not only welcome our stay and accept us into the community, but also endeavor to improve human rights in China. Nevertheless, we are exceedingly regretful that this good intention is being exploited by special interest groups to further their own agenda.

The Falun Gong group and its affiliates, the major organizers of this mock torch relay, are not truthful promoters of human rights. The Falun Gong group's track records are replete with exaggerations and fantasies. The group is marked by their outright hostilities toward China, and some of their claims have been discredited by the United States government. We are concerned that this mock torch relay may turn out to be another public display of vicious and untruthful attacks on China. In that case, it would be a mistake to honor their causes as promoting “human right,” and indeed, it would be a mockery to the sacrifice that Chinese people have made.

We recognize and appreciate legitimate concerns for human right violations in China. We do not unconditionally endorse actions of the Chinese government. But we also want nothing short of a truthful presentation of the human rights conditions in China. A biased picture provided by special interest groups would not help promote human rights in China. On the contrary, it would endanger further improvements by inviting cynicism and distrust.

Presenting the public with a balanced image of modern China is also of vital interest to the United States. A one-sided version that demonizes China would not only cloud the judgment of the citizens in both countries, but also create misunderstandings and hostilities between the two governments. At this delicate moment, an open-minded citizen would certainly appreciate a different opinion of China. The world expects the United States and China to address human rights issues in an open and collaborative manner, not in antagonism and isolation.

We also believe that the Olympic torch, a symbol of understanding and cooperation that transcends national, cultural, and racial boundaries, should not be mocked. The history of New Haven, shaped by immigration and integration, is a history of bringing people together regardless of their cultural heritage or race. We hope that our public gathering will confirm and further the ideals of this city, ideals that echo with the Olympic spirit of promoting peace and cooperation without discrimination.

In addition, we would like to briefly note the violence that occurred during the recent anti-China protests in San Francisco, Paris, and London. Dozens of protesters were arrested for their aggressive and violent behavior, many of whom are associated with the organizers of this mock torch relay. The principal organizer of New Haven's protest, the local Falun Gong Club, has had a troubled relationship with the Chinese community. Members of our group have been threatened or aggressively harassed by the Falun Gong Club, and many of them have expressed concerns that the anti-China sentiments stirred by this mock torch relay may affect their future safety..

We will promptly provide any further information of our proposed gathering upon request. We look forward to your understanding and support, and thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely yours,

Yeqing Zheng

Committee of Supporting Beijing Olympics at Yale

April 18th, 2008

Sarkozy's sympathy letter to Jin Jing

On April 21, Christian Poncelet, President of the French Senate, came to Shanghai and brought a sympathy letter by French President Nicolas Sarkozy to Jin Jing, the Chinese Paralympic fencer and torch bearer during the Olympic Torch Relay in Paris. Jin Jing was repeatedly attacked by Tibet-independence protesters, an incident that sparked overwhelming indignation among the Chinese worldwide.

Chère Mademoiselle Jin Jing,

Je voudrais vous dire toute mon émotion pour la façon dont vous avez été bousculée à Paris le 7 avril dernier lorsque vous portiez la flamme olympique. Vous avez fait preuve d’un courage remarquable qui vous fait honneur, et à travers vous, à tout votre pays.

Comme j’ai eu l’occasion de le souligner le lendemain même du passage de la flamme olympique en France, je comprends que la sensibilité chinoise ait été blessée par ce qui s’est passé, et en particulier par l’attaque inadmissible dont vous avez été victime et que je réprouve avec la plus grande vigueur.

Ce qui s’est produit à Paris le 7 avril a engendré dans votre pays de l’amertume. Je tiens à vous assurer que les incidents de cette triste journée, provoqués par quelques uns, ne reflètent pas les sentiments de mes concitoyens pour le peuple chinois.

Pour tenter d’effacer ce moment pénible, je souhaite vous proposer de vous rendre en France dans les prochaines semaines comme mon invitée personnelle, et celle du peuple de France.

Dans l’attente de vous accueillir à Paris, je vous prie de bien vouloir accepter, chère Mademoiselle Jin Jing, l'expression de ma profonde sympathie, et vous demande de bien vouloir transmettre à l’ensemble de votre famille et à vos proches l’expression de mes sentiments les plus cordiaux.

Nicolas SARKOZY

Talking with my Taiwanese friend about NYT's report on the Duke freshman Grace Wang incident

Last night I read the report "Chinese Student in U.S. Is Caught in Confrontation" on the New York Times website. According to the report, there was confrontation between Chinese students and pro-Tibet people on the Duke campus on April 10, when Grace Wang from Qingdao, China tried to get the two sides to talk but was labeled "traitor" by her fellow Chinese. She was slandered on the internet and received threats.

This morning I got two emails asking for my comments on this. One of the emails came from my Taiwanese friend. In fact, if there are two major "traitor" incidents on both coasts in April, she was caught right in the middle of the west coast one. She said：

“I don't understand why Chinese people do not tolerate or listen to other voices. To be honest, I don't understand how China can gain Tibetans or Taiwanese' hearts by doing so.”

Here is my response:

Hi XX:

Thanks for the message. I read this news last night before you sent me the link. I think the treatment Grace received from some of the Chinese people is unfair and unfortunate. Many posts on the 163.com discussion board on this topic range from pathetic to downright evil, and I believe posting her home address, parents' information and other sensitive data is illegal. You can also see some people calling for the more extreme ones to calm down. Birds of a feather flock together, the internet routinely magnifies irrational sentiments to an intolerable extent. I, for one, wouldn't bother to argue with these people on their turf.

I agree with you that China cannot win either Tibetan or Taiwanese heart with people like this.

One of my best friends is at Duke and I will call him to ask for some alternative accounts. In controversial contexts like this, I tend to have more confidence in individual accounts than the news media. Overall I think this piece of report is in keeping with NYT's relatively higher standard of journalism ethics. But it is not free of problems.

The reporter quoted indirect remarks but shunned from recording the opinions of Chinese students who are sympathetic with Grace and think she didn't do anything to deserve such heinous treatment. My bet is that there are plenty of such people, but NYT wouldn't let them talk because that undermines the stereotype it tries to convey to the American public: "200 of your own fellow nationalists yelling at you and calling you a traitor and even threatening to kill you." As Chinese I know this is a grossly inaccurate characterization of the Chinese student population at Duke. But an average American would have much less trouble in assimilating this stereotype and think: "Geez, even the most highly educated Chinese are like this. The Chinese at home must be so hopelessly barbarian and they haven't changed much since the Boxer Rebellion in 1900. Cafferty actually got it right in calling them 50 years' of 'goons and thugs'."

On a more technical note, one quote from an email “If you return to China, your dead corpse will be chopped into 10,000 pieces” is a literal translation of the Chinese idiom "碎尸万段"(Sui4 Shi1 Wan4 Duan4). Chinese idioms, mostly composed of four characters, have been in existence for hundreds of and occasionally more than one thousand years. These idioms come from an age when the human beings were indeed much less civilized, and when used in modern context they often lose the literal meaning. By translating this idiom literally into English without noting its origin as an ancient idiom, the writer imposes on the e-mailer a near-terrorist image which I don't think he/she deserves.

Chinese media did similar things to convince the Chinese that many westerners are the same bunch of "goons and thugs" (from Jack Cafferty, CNN Situation Room, April 9) that invaded and humiliated China for 100 years. That is how misunderstanding and animosity between East and West deepened rather than alleviated throughout this whole event.

In recent centuries, the West has achieved a higher level of civilization which many of us admire from the bottom of our hearts and come a long way to learn from. In recent decades, the Chinese are making quick progress, both economically and mentally. The mental progress is subtle and calls for great endeavor to appreciate and measure. From the vantage point of a higher level of human development, the West should recognize and encourage the progress in the Chinese mentality, because that signals the its sincerity to welcome China to the same level of civilization. Manufacturing stereotypes, on the other hand, signals its fear, insecurity and deep-seated bias.

It is my sincere hope that these subtle mental progress would materialize in the form of fundamental institutional changes, and together they would someday come to fruition that Tibet won't find it necessary to rely on the West to preserve its religion and culture, and Taiwan won't have to turn to the West to defend its democratic values and security. That is the day we can all call China our home.

I am doing my bit of job to make that happen and I'm sure millions of others are doing the same thing too.

Best,
Zhan

A personal statement -- In response to Tinglong

Hmm, last night I told Minjie that I have scheduled some writings (some "scoop" if you will) later this week that would "happen" to make him happier -- actually make both you guys happier.

I will do that.

It is not uncommon for perfectly reasonable people to disagree on political issues, because politics is about infinite complexity. I look forward to a lot of good discussions with you and Minjie when we all have time in the future.

When I disapprove A, I generally don't take the pains to stress that I disagree with B who share my interest in disapproving A (may or may not for different reasons), because that doesn't help sharpening my arguments. But yes, sometimes it is necessary to state one's position very clearly.

During the recent media turmoils since mid-March, I formed each and every one of my opinions strictly by my own judgments, and I'm sure many people here do so too. Criticizing western media bias doesn't mean I approve of China's information control or its non-democratic political system. I certainly do not align with extreme nationalists who are eager to pick fights with anybody who doesn't seem to match their own level of "patriotism", but I also condemn those bigots and hypocrites (and they came out in non-trivial numbers and ferocity this time) who so ignorantly (or blissfully?) crawl on presumptuous moral high-grounds without ever opening their eyes to reality and never waste a second in demonizing countries and peoples different from their own.

So for me the task is always two-fold, and the only criteria I stick to are objectivity and rationality. By doing so I run the risk of alienating both groups who may see value in my arguments for their respective causes, but I do not lend or sell mine to those people I despise. This is the only possible way for me. I cannot tolerate violations of these criteria during serious discussions. And CNN broadcast is meant to be very serious. Jack Cafferty must apologize and be punished.

I am neither a Permanent Resident or US citizen so may not be in the best position to advocate for expanding civil rights for Chinese Americans. But one thing is clear to me. Martin Luther King Jr. did not hold back his relentless pursuit for civil rights until his fellow African Americans around the country stopped committing crimes and attained the same level of education and civility as Whites. By the same token, it makes absolutely no sense that simply because China is not good enough that someone up there on CNN could insult the Chinese (no matter which country's passport they hold) without getting punished.

Criticism is alway welcome; insult, never.

So we are mixing several separate issues here. I agree that Chinese people within China's border need not over-react to outside news and can always remain skeptical as to whether certain facets of political news were censored (and if yes, question and challenge the authority for doing that) and focus on domestic development and reform. For Chinese people abroad, the task is very different because they read materials in both languages, the picture is much fuller and least censored for them than those who can only read English yet never suspect that the free press can sometimes betray them by inserting some brainwashing stuff under disguise.

Transcript of Jack Cafferty's "goons and thugs" comment, April 9, CNN

CNN

THE SITUATION ROOM

Transcript

YouTube video clip

Aired April 9, 2008 - 18:00 ET

*****PART 1*****

BLITZER: All right. Abbi, thanks very much. We will stay on top of this story.

I want to go to Jack Cafferty right now. He's got "The Cafferty File."

Jack, it's been a pretty amazing couple hours.

JACK CAFFERTY, CNN ANCHOR: I have been sitting in my office watching your coverage the last two hours. I have never seen anything like this.

BLITZER: Yes.

CAFFERTY: I can remember 1980 when Jimmy Carter said we weren't going to send the Olympic team to the Games in Moscow because of the Russian invasion of Afghanistan, and that had repercussions and implications.

But we didn't have the kind of instantaneous communication capability that we have now with the Internet and satellites. And all of a sudden, this thing just grows right up out of the ground and becomes this huge event. And the people in -- in Beijing, I mean, this is a preview of the kind of thing that they're going to have to deal with on some level, when these Games happen later this summer. I mean, memories of Tiananmen Square come to mind when we had the military finally crack down on those pro-democracy demonstrators.

What's the Chinese government going to do when people who are sympathetic to the folks in Darfur or Tibet dare to venture out into Red Square or one of those main thoroughfares with a Tibetan flag or something?

The Chinese government is going to be in a very, very difficult position. And I have never seen anything quite like this. And it's interesting to think what might be lying ahead in the summertime.

BLITZER: You have got to ask yourself, be careful what you wish for. The Chinese really wanted to host these Olympic Games. Maybe it was not necessarily such a great idea years ago when they were awarded the Games.

CAFFERTY: A lot of people at the time argued against giving them the Games for this very reason.

The other consequence of all of this controversy is the sponsorship. I was reading a thing this morning at home, where some of the sponsors are beginning to get concerned about the controversy surrounding just the running of the torch through the various streets.

If the sponsors get cold feet and begin to back away -- and you can't blame them -- they don't want anything controversial to be associated with their products -- then there's a whole other dimension to this that begins to develop.

The network that's going to -- is it NBC carrying the Summer Games?

BLITZER: NBC, yes.

CAFFERTY: I mean, they paid billions of dollars for the rights to carry these Games. If their get sponsors that say, hey, you know what, we're not comfortable, I mean, it's -- this is going to be quite a story. It may pale these political conventions as we move through the summer.

Anyway, I have rattled on long enough. But you guys have done a great job, I thought, watching the coverage. I enjoyed it.

BLITZER: Thank you.



*****PART 2*****

BLITZER: All right, thanks very much.

Susan Roesgen reporting.

We'll talk a little bit more about those airline delays later, as well as the massive and controversial changes to the Olympic torch relay that we just saw in San Francisco.

In fact, I want to talk about that right now, as well as the growing calls on President Bush to boycott the opening ceremonies in Beijing.

Let's discuss this and more with our CNN senior analyst, Jeff Toobin. He's in New York along with Jack Cafferty. Gloria Borger is here in Washington.

I'm going to play a little clip of what Hillary Clinton says about boycotting the opening ceremonies and then we'll discuss.

Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CLINTON: I think you've got to separate out the Olympic movement, which is an international sporting event that's hosted every two years in the summer and winter by a host nation. And that's why what I've called for is a government to government response. I believe that the president should not attend the opening ceremonies because that is giving a seal of approval by our United States government.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: So far, Jack, we haven't heard specifically from the White House whether the president will attend that opening ceremony. He's going to Beijing to watch the Games. Barack Obama hasn't taken a specific statement -- a position on that yet, either.

What do you think about this growing call to boycott the opening ceremonies?

CAFFERTY: Well, I think, you know, that based on China's record in some of these places, like Darfur and Tibet, that you could justify boycotting the opening ceremonies.

But the bigger issue is how do you separate the Games from the politics. And I don't think you can unless you establish a permanent home for the Olympics in some place like Geneva, Switzerland. I mean it's a small global village we're a of now. And whoever is going to host those games, you can bet, you know, your allowance that there's going to be somebody who's coming to the games that doesn't think you've done the right thing about X, Y and Z. And I don't know how you avoid combining the politics with the athletics.

BLITZER: The theory, Gloria, as you know, in awarding China the venue, the host -- to be the host of the Olympic Games was that international responsibility would make them a more cooperative partner globally on many of these issues.

GLORIA BORGER, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, how has that worked out?

CAFFERTY: Sure.

BORGER: Not particularly well. And, you know, the opening ceremony, Wolf -- and I think Hillary Clinton said this does put that stamp of approval on the host country. And so I think the president is kind of staying back and keeping his options open. That's what John McCain said the president ought to do in a radio interview today.

Hillary Clinton has already come out and said you ought to boycott it. The prime minister in Great Britain has said that he would boycott it. So I think the president's hanging back and perhaps trying to use this as some leverage with the Chinese.

But the question of whether it should have been in China in the first place, it's a little late at this point, you know, to try and revisit that. It's there.

BLITZER: What do you think, Jeff?

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Well, I think the hosting of the Olympic Games is a political act. And whether it was the Nazis in 1936 or the Chinese communists in 2008, they are all using it to promote their country. And if we want to take a stand against that kind of repression, not going to the opening ceremony is a very appropriate way of doing it because it doesn't penalize the athletes at all.

The athletes can still compete. But it does say the United States government doesn't approve of the Chinese government. And that seems like a very appropriate message to send right now.

BLITZER: One of the arguments that some of the pro-China elements is making, Jack, is that this is a very different China today than existed 10 years ago, certainly 20 or 30 years ago. This communist regime today is almost like a capitalist regime. They're a huge economic superpower and that we have a lot at stake in maintaining this economic relationship with China.

CAFFERTY: Well, I don't know if China is any different, but our relationship with China is certainly different. We're in hock to the Chinese up to our eyeballs because of the war in Iraq, for one thing. They're holding hundreds of billions of dollars worth of our paper. We also are running hundred of billions of dollars worth of trade deficits with them, as we continue to import their junk with the lead paint on them and the poisoned pet food and export, you know, jobs to places where you can pay workers a dollar a month to turn out the stuff that we're buying from Wal-Mart. So I think our relationship with China has certainly changed. I think they're basically the same bunch of goons and thugs they've been for the last 50 years.

"Let the Games go on", by Joan Chen

The Washington Post

Let the Games Go On

By Joan Chen

Wednesday, April 9, 2008; Page A19

I was born in Shanghai in 1961 and grew up during the Cultural Revolution. During my childhood, I saw my family lose our house. My grandfather, who studied medicine in England, committed suicide after he was wrongly accused of being a counterrevolutionary and a foreign spy.

Those were the worst of times.

Since the Cultural Revolution ended in the late 1970s, however, I have witnessed unimaginable progress in China. Changes that few ever thought possible have occurred in a single generation. A communist government that had no ties to the West has evolved into a more open government eager to join the international community.

A state-controlled economy has morphed into a market economy, greatly raising people's standard of living. It's clear that the majority of the Chinese people enjoy much fuller, more abundant lives today than 30 years ago. Though much remains to be done, the Chinese government has made rapid progress in opening up and trying to be part of the international community.

Last month I went to China and spent four weeks visiting Shanghai, Beijing, Hong Kong and Chengdu. The people I met and spoke with are proud and excited about the Beijing Games. They believe that the Olympics are a wonderful opportunity to showcase modern China to the rest of the world. Like many Americans, most Chinese people are disturbed by the recent events in Tibet. But after watching the scenes of violence and arson by the rioters, the Chinese believe that the government is doing the right thing in cracking down to restore order.

The Olympic torch is in California and is to be carried through San Francisco today. In a resolution criticizing China, Chris Daly, a member of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, said that demonstrating against the torch relay would "provide the people of San Francisco with a lifetime opportunity to help 1.3 billion Chinese people gain more freedom and rights." To his credit, Mayor Gavin Newsom did not sign Daly's resolution.

This statement could not be further from reality. For one thing, the Chinese are a proud people. They want freedom and greater rights, but they know they must fight for them from within. They know that no one can grant them freedom and rights from afar. The stigma of Western imperialism and the Opium Wars also remains a strong reminder of the past, and Chinese people do not want their domestic policies to be dictated by outside powers. They also do not want the United States to boycott the opening ceremonies of the Games. The U.S. boycott of the 1980 Games in Moscow and the Soviet boycott of the 1984 Olympics in Los Angeles accomplished nothing. A U.S. boycott of the opening ceremonies in Beijing would be counterproductive for relations between the two countries.

For decades, anti-China human rights groups in Washington have spent millions of dollars denouncing China. To many Chinese, it seems that this lobby is the only voice that's acceptable or newsworthy in the U.S. media and to the U.S. government. But times are changing. We need to be open-minded and farsighted. We need to make more friends than enemies. Remember what a little ping-pong game did for Sino-U.S. relations in the 1970s? Let's celebrate the Olympics for what the Games are meant to be -- a bridge for friendship, not a playground for politics.

The writer is an actress and director. She became a U.S. citizen in 1989.

Hogan Chao at 6:35pm April 15

im so surprised that she is such a good critic and her timely comment under current situation as an actress demonstrates a call for more voices from various grounds in support of chinese justice upholding and unity of peoples.

Lawrence Zhan Zhang at 6:59pm April 15

you certainly cannot rule out the possibility that some great writer's behind her. Anyway, it's the kind of voice acutely lacking in the mainstream media, and it's from the bottom of hearts of many Chinese people.

Note to the founder of "Save That Fire Union"

Dear Ted:

Thanks for your initiative of establishing this group. It is a great idea, and the action is right in time.

I have invited each and every one of my facebook friends, altogether 185, to join this group. Many of them are not Chinese, but I want them to see how we Chinese see these protests and the broader picture, and our solidarity (and yes, our diversity too).

We want to make friends with as many people in the world as possible, regardless of nationality, race or age. We certainly don't want to create a "China vs. rest of the world" impression, which is untrue: most of the people, at least all my facebook friends, are very friendly. And we want them to see beyond the biased, filtered information provided by the "free" media, and have some reality check.

Your description of the purpose of STFU is wonderful. However, some language do not seem to serve our broader purpose ideally, like the sharp opposition of "You" and "We". Many of the foreigners who are going to see this group in the coming hours and days don't have the least intention to protest the Torch Relay or boycott the Olympic Games. They want the Games to be successful as much as we do.

I understand it would be hard to make this literal change. To back up one step, can you at least change the title of the group to "Save That Fire Union -- Chinese and all PEOPLE in the world backing the torch relay"?

Thank you very much for your consideration. And again, I applaud your initiative of setting up this group.

Best wishes,
Lawrence

Some follow-up exchange between Teddy and me -- I like what Teddy said.

Hi Lawrence,

I appreciate your suggestions and they are really well said. I can change the description but the change in group name has to go through written request made to facebook people, it's a technical issue. I thought about the "China v.s. rest of the world" thing when writing the description, and I did have concerns you have. But the thing is, it is unlikely that we can be too friendly in such condition. Confronted by such hostility, are we supposed to react like Gandhi? By choosing the wording of "You" and "We", I really meant to groups of people on rivalry. "We" are those who are going to protect it, "You" are not the rest of the world, but those who are disrupting the relay and damaging our dignities. I truly believe the kind of wording would not offend those who believes in goods. Please keep that passion ('save that fire') for the on-going event and write to me again when any idea pops up. You can also write to savethatfireunion@gmail.co

m. The email address is valid.

Thanks again,
Teddy Yang


Hi Teddy:

I appreciate your quick response and I do echo with your thoughts. The subtle changes you made, such as keeping only the acronym of S-T-F-U, do make our group look more civilized, in keeping with our nation's core value. I'm not familiar with Gandhi's deeds nor do I necessarily identify with his ideology as described in the textbook, but I think it's in our best interest not to offend people of good will. It's OK for a person to be outraged at violent behaviors, but as a group we need more rationality in order to maximize our long term appeal. The Torch still has a long way to go.

Just my two cents, kudos to you for doing this for all of us!

Take care,
Lawrence