The letter

These are not just "allegations," and the use of such a term by an elected public official in an official statement, unfortunately tends to give credence to denials by the Chinese government, and confuses the public. These reports are based on evidence, of the sort which might hold up in a court of law, were it possible for it to be presented there. It is true that we cannot cite sources for some statements, because many come from relatives or friends of victims who might be subjected to harassment if they were cited. In many cases, however, publicly available sources are used. And there are also many, many other human rights violations for which there is suggestive though not conclusive evidence, and from which we therefore do not draw definite conclusions. As an example of the latter category, I might refer you to the reports of the Falun Gong organization, or to the recent report issued in Canada by David Kilgour, M.P. and David Matas. We do not take positions on these or many other "allegations," but those on which we do issue statements, we can prove to be well founded.

You do not need to believe us, however, because there are so many victims of the Chinese government's repression in greater Los Angeles, indeed in Pasadena itself. You might want to meet with them, as I have done, and if you do, I doubt you would be inclined to dismiss their stories as mere "allegations." Indeed, though you are perhaps unaware of it, the repressive actions of the Chinese government are not limited to China itself, but in all probability are taking place every day in Pasadena at Cal Tech and other universities and most certainly at other places in the United States. Chinese students abroad are kept under regular surveillance, and are often threatened with reprisals upon return to China, if they get out of line. I have testified as an expert witness in numerous political asylum cases, and have had personal experience that this is so.

Let me now turn to the issues posed by the float. I have reviewed Mr. Keedy's letter to you of Oct. 26. He states therein that certain organizations “requested the inclusion of additional units in the Parade to help publicize their cause. We believe this would be inappropriate for a variety of reasons..." One might ask, what might those reasons be? Why is it "inappropriate" for a Parade which highlights the Olympics--to which we certainly do not object--to "publicize" the cause of human rights and Olympic ideals as well? Many of your constituents obviously agree, as witness the actions and petitions of recent months.

I had said earlier that we wished to engage in a dialogue about how this might be done, and I hope this would still be possible. The irreducible conclusion is that, while the float in itself may not be controversial, its inclusion in the Parade, without any attempt to represent the issues of human rights and Olympic goals as well, threatens to do irreversible harm to the reputation of your city both nationally and internationally.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Yours sincerely,

James H. Zimmerman, Jr.
Country Specialist, China

Cc: C.L. Keedy III