更别说网站其他文章下面什么《welcome to america》之类的文章

随便顺次copy前3个贴

David Tam
Utah

Good to hear that Obama's administration makes a good progress to show the United States American acts on its value: freedom.
It is a symbol to show we care as we did in the first day that the United States of American was establish in 1776.
Some may say it is not fair that foreigners can just come freely as long as they are persecuted in their own country. It is correct. It is similar to the early settlers of Americans; they can freely come to the new continent: American. When someone is beaten, but successfully escaped and came to my house asking for protection, should I cast him/her out? If I can a place for him/her to say, I will try to persuade all my family members to protect the innocent, no matter what race, color, where he/she came from. Do you agree?

Matsuda
Fukuoka, Japan

We can easily imagine that it is very risky for Chinese to criticize the policy of the country. The US government also understands it. But why the US officials tried to remain Mr. Chen in China at first? Perhaps it has become more important for the US government to keep close economic cooperation with China than to keep the hard line against the human right problem of China. What halfway measures the US government took! Not only dissidents in China but also quite a few people in other democratic countries are disappointed at the handling of the US government.

Sean L
Los Angeles, CA

There is nothing more important than human life, and the fact that the United States had a clear opportunity to help a persecuted blind lawyer in China is significant for that reason alone. We did the right thing when we took advantage of the open door to help someone in grave danger. Then we negotiated a bad deal for apparently utilitarian purposes (or political, but I'm going to assume moral reasoning was determinative) . How do we know it was a bad deal? Because none of the negotiators or the State Dept itself will defend it. Instead, they simply claim that Mr. Chen wanted it. Anyone think Hillary Clinton, Harold Koh or Gary Locke would've taken that deal when their wife and family would be sent back to the "village" if they didn't? Impossible. Even if the Chinese Foreign Ministry was sincere, there's no evidence that they had the power to prevent a repeat of previous torture. Thus, someone on the Politburo needed to explicitly approve the deal. That clearly never happened, as the police immediately moved in upon Chen's release.

If granting an application for asylum is ever appropriate, it's hard to imagine what doesn't makes this situation a worthy and compelling application. By the way, if you've ever wondered whether American Exceptionism is a joke, Mr. Chen's choice of our embassy proved that clearly it is not.

The State Dept -- and I presume Obama's -- value judgements missed the mark here. We can do better when we have clear opportunity to protect human life.

--------------------------------------

随便举一个，你特意选出的评论

I have one question: who pays for him to come here and study?

你以为这种类型的帖子就是表示不欢迎？？傻B思维，用纳税人的钱做某事好不好，和做某事好不好，是完全不同的两回事。好比说美国教育部花钱，提高教育质量，必然有不少人质疑，美国这个教育部为什么要存在，为什么要花纳税人的钱成立这个部门？但这些绝不是说，这些人认为不应该去办好教育！！！

陈光诚得到资助和自己赚钱是不成问题的，该不该接受陈，提供保护，是一回事，该政府出钱还是该民间组织出钱是另外一回事。莫非AA吃饭喝酒的就是讨厌对方，要对方滚蛋？这是傻B的思维方式。