guess china tire of spending half million/yr to monitor him/his family, see an opportunity to get rid of him/his family and let US taxpayer to pay his flight, living expense, handicap, medcare, disability care, living cost for him and his family etc while thousands american student can't afford to school who speak better english and has better grades than him.
well guess you like to pay some foreigner for their school and housing instead american. serfin USA or screw american
Hell, if you think this sort of thing costs a lot, look at how much we've thrown at banks, auto companies, and the military industrial complex. Providing asylum for some random activist doesn't bother me much in the grand scheme of things.
Chinese dissident Chen Guangcheng has been offered a visiting scholar position at New York University and as a fellow at New York University's law school, he was given an apartment that is part of faculty housing. The university has given him a safe haven to ease Sino-US tension over China's treatment of rights activists and Chen could go back to China quickly at the end of the year.
Chen's English may be so good that Rep. Christopher H. Smith, a Republican Congressman from New Jersey, had to get a Chinese pastor (who was kneeling beside the congressman) to translate for him. Texas pastor a key player in Chen Guangcheng case http://articles.latimes.com/keyword/chen-guangcheng Chen Guangcheng Phones Into U.S. Congressional Hearing http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ZDFt7v6HAc Please also refer to http://www.politicalforum.com/humor-satire/248598-blindmans-game.html
Students from Asia go to America, Europe, Australia etc all the time on scholarships. Nothing new and nothing unsual. The difference with Chen Guangcheng is that he's high profile.
If any Tom, Dick, or Harry can be qualified for a scholarship to a university despite his low or even zero standard in the language of study, the high regard for scholarship will fall to ground level as time goes on.
You haven't got a clue what you are prattling on about. Students being sent from undeveloped countries to developed countries on scholarships go through a thorough selection process by way of English language proficiency and academia. Not every Tom, Dick or Harriette are chosen. For English language alone, students are tested via IELTS,,, and believe me, there would be native English speakers who would fare poorly in an IELTS test. This is how it works in Laos with the Australian Development Scholarships and the Fullbright scholarships to America. Other countries will be the same.
The problem is that our blind friend does not know even a single word of English. Just tell me how many marks he can get in an IELTS test. The only advantage he has over others is that no matter how much (lizard) dust you throw in his eyes, he won't feel anything.
Question is: Why is the american goverment giving shelter to this man, knowing it will upset the chinese goverment who have for whatever reason concerns over one blind man. It is not going to further a positive conclusion, only breed mistrust. So what is 'special' about this man to create a downgrade in relations or: Is this political naivity on behalf of the americans to perhaps intentionally create another rift with a developing super power.
I know how this works, Zod. If we defend this guy, we're naive or just needlessly creating tension with China. If we hand him over to the Chinese government, then we're hypocrites selling out to China. Either way, the world will give us (*)(*)(*)(*) for it, so I honestly don't care which way we go with it.
It is a question that has to be asked. A nation like china, america will have to do business with for the forseeable future. So any diplomatic rifts is not a good idea and every one should be viewed under the micoscope of political insight.
Maybe so, but it seems like, half of the time, people are demanding that we be more consistent about supporting human rights, and then when we make a move in that direction, we get condemned for some other reason. I guess the question is... should our principles be purely dependent on our trade interests? In a lot of ways, they already are, but then we get a lot of flack over it. Look at how much crap we get for supporting the Saudi regime for that exact reason.
Most of the time, the critism to the usa seems to be this: To shut up and quite down. Now live by your own ideals. But the usa can never manage it, To which they exist in a weird fantasy of their own making, believing they are supermen of human rights. Now to be more realistic and more inline with the topic. The view of political gamesmanship with foreign goverments is a complex business. This chinese blind man, it is very doubtfull the usa embassy in china even care who or what he is. To Washington using him as a pawn in the game with their chinese goverment counterparts. But what move are they making?
That describes a lot of the flag-waving types, but honestly, our critics seem to be equally deluded half of the time. There are far too many people out there who buy into the hippie fantasy that war is never necessary or that there aren't valid threats out there from radicals. It's to score a few political points. Ultimately, it's not going to change anything. The Chinese have too much invested in us to sanction us. By the same token, we're too dependent on them to tariff them. Chen is just a talking point for a few politicians.
I think the ultimate problem with the usa, my own view. Please understand. They are loud and scream things they can't do. Ie, americans shout about human rights but when told (ok, now demostrate it) they act like a drunk man chasing pigeons (they have no got a clue what to do, only continue to shout some more) But this topic is interesting on the level of political games with both sets of goverments all over one elderly man. Both goverments lie in sound bites, with explanations of more idealistic speeches.
dude if he want to get into US and study here. he should do so like any other people, which is pass TOEFL or GRE or GMAT which is the basic requiremnt for university grad school. because he is an activist, he get special tradement which bypass all the exam/grade that typically required to enroll in a university. does it sound fair to thousands american student try to get into LAW school by working hard through out their life, and still couldn't go because they can't afford the tuition etc. Not only he got into NYU Law school by not taking any exam or submit transcript, but we the taxper are paying him/his family expense for god knows how long. the money US spend on him probably can pay the tuitinon for several AMERICAN STUDENTS, who has better grade, english etc than him. china is laughing their butt off right now. it take around half million yuan just to monitor him and his family every year. Now, not only they get rid of him and his family PAYED by the US government, but they score a face point with US government by allow him move to US, and let US taxpayer to take care him/his family from now on.
Of course, you can defend anyone you like regardless of his ability to speak English. The absurdity, however, is this. For example, if you were a blind Native American activist who can't speak a word of Chinese, but you were offered a visiting scholar position at a Chinese university's law school, isn't it ridiculous?
We've got a lot of problems with immigration policy. I'm not disputing that. I ended up having to end a long distance relationship because our policies make it very difficult for Western Europeans to immigrate here. Meanwhile, we have tons of Africans, South Asians, and Latin Americans coming here all the time. So yeah, I'm not a fan of unfair policies. With Chen, it's politics. As you said, he's here because he's high profile. I'm just saying that expecting them not to bend the rules in a situation like this is very unrealistic and his English proficiency really doesn't matter.
It's ridiculous until you take into account the politics of the situation. We both know this isn't being done to further the studies of a school so much as it is to score points for a few politicians.
personally i think its win-win for china and US government. china get rid of a trouble maker, save some money, obama/hilary score a human right point. the only loser is the tax-payer and american students. i hope other activist doesn't take this example as free roll to US pay by US
I guess I've gotten to the point where I no longer am surprised by the government doing things to screw me over as a taxpayer.