Is President Bush right in denying China’s Emperor and head of state in exile any right to Secret Service protection and other things guaranteed under the law?
1. The Imperial family fled China in 1871, during the time of Manchurian reign in mainland China.
2. They (the family) are political exiles, who would be killed if they were returned to mainland China.
3. Question: Should we disallow China’s Emperor’s stay in this country and force his return to mainland China? From what we have observed, President Bush seems to think so!
President Bush has REFUSED official recognition and thereby has disallowed Secret Service protection for China’s Emperor’s temporary stay in our nation.
Question: Is President Bush right in his handling of this matter?
.
Absolutely!
Comment by Karl — August 20, 2007 @ 1:27 am
President Bush is just plain WRONG altogether.
Comment by skibm80 — August 21, 2007 @ 11:27 am
When you twist reality this much to try and attack the President I can only shake my head in wonder. Everyone with an IQ over 40 knows the last Chinese Emperor never left China and died working as a gardner.
Comment by Be nice — August 22, 2007 @ 10:17 pm
President Bush will do anything that allows his buddies to make billions off of cheap, imported Red Chinese (Communist!!!) crap!!!
“Screw the American worker” they say! Let’s sell them out to the Communists!
Comment by David R — August 24, 2007 @ 2:31 am
After everything china has done for us lately. Like lead paint on toys to poison in pet food and tooth paste. I say don’t help any diplomat from china or that has any association with china. I do not see a benefit to Americans by helping those who seek to harm us.
Comment by cashflowchris1 — August 27, 2007 @ 2:02 pm
I’d say He’s right, why should my tax dollars be spent on protecting a foreign national!?!?!?
Comment by Thunder.45 — August 28, 2007 @ 5:41 am
Well what else would you have Bush do? Think about it. No one has tried to kill the Emperor or any of his family since they left China, so why in the world would you try to stir up trouble now?
Buddy, we have a lot more pressing issues to worry about and should not focus on an emperor who is not threatened by anyone. The US has officially recognized China for many years. We can not, by treaty or law, recognize another form of government. I think we recognized them way back in Nixon’s administration and every president since then has kept it the same. Why do you try to make trouble over a non-issue?
Comment by Squirrel_Cage — August 31, 2007 @ 1:50 am
Cuz we owe the whole daggone world a favor and rights of protection? No let that Emperor get his own daggone protection. You want us to send over a chef and some butlers as well? Maybe provide him with a big house overlooking the sea? It’s not our job! You want to help him? You send him some money and gather other people to do the same. How can you come here and say that you expect our nation to be responsible for somebody just because he was a dignitary someplace else? Same kind of Hand me another Gov’t check mentality as always. We Don’t Owe You Jack!! Should our gov’t also send air and shipfare for every person that wants to leave China? What else would you like to request from us?
Comment by Joe H — August 31, 2007 @ 8:36 am
Mr Bush is actually using his brain and leaving things alone in another country.
True, there are certain things that should be recognised, but China is a Super Power, and will remain one for some time.
If it were a smaller nation with lakes of oil, and no power; he would have been interfering with his ”boots blacked”.
All in the name of Democracy and Freedom of course. (Oh! and throw in a smidgen of Al Qaeda).
Comment by rogerglyn — August 31, 2007 @ 12:08 pm
No real status. Claimed status is not recognized. A hereditary descendant of a deposed ruler is hardly considered a diplomat.
Comment by Locutus1of1 — August 31, 2007 @ 4:20 pm
The last emperor of China was Pu Yi and he lived in China after the Communist revolution. If there is someone else claiming to be the emperor than Bush is correct in denying any protection to them.
Comment by Hubert D — September 2, 2007 @ 4:55 pm