[quote=“Eric W. Lier”] Not only did the American Hunger strikers…have a permit to protest. They also filed and obtained the additional requirement of special permission from the Ministry of Education for foreigners to speak in public.
They clearly stated that they were labor activist on their visa application form and were here on business. [/quote]
According to the news at the time what you say is inaccurate.
If it were true then it would be interesting but I just don’t believe you Eric. You have said so much stuff on this forum that was clearly wrong and clearly misleading, that I find it difficult to believe that you have finally got something right.
Assuming that what you say is correct however, I am wondering how you know it to be true?
Also, where on your visa application can you state that your purpose for entry is labor activism? To the best of my recollection you are either a student, a tourist, or a worker, so what do you tick to denote political activism?
Finally I am somewhat suprised that you never mentioned this before. It is certainly very important information that is very much relevant to the case. I have challenged you on this issue many times before and you always claimed that it was a freedom of speech issue. Why is it that you never mentioned these facts before?
You are not telling us porkies are you Eric?!
Again, assuming that this is true, then I assume that they were not deported the first time they came. So they were allowed to exercise their rights to free speech the first time round, but not the second time round. Doesn’t that suggest to you that this is not a freedom of speech issue but more an issue of them acting in breach of their visa conditions.
It is my understanding that they refused to move on when the police asked them to do so.
It probably doesn’t help your argument to group these two seperate events together.
With the exception of yourself, every one seems to accept that Scott was in breach of his visa conditions and was deported for this. You have failed to show otherwise and your claims about the case have been inconsistent at best.
I don’t think that there was ever any confusion there. Judges are generally intelligent people who make decisions upon the information at hand. They are not generally known to pursue wild theories that go against all common-sense and for which there is absolutely no proof of.
You do however judge things, possibly more than anyone else on this forum. Every one of us has opinions on matters, but you present your theories as being fact, when they clearly are not.
And if you are a criminal in Taiwan, regardless of your nationality, you are entitled to a court hearing. Deportations do not come before the courts unless there is an appeal and in that case your case would be heard by a court. This is exactly what happened in Scott Ezells case.
Where is that ruling? You have stated that it exists a number of times and in fact your argument is solely based upon this one claim, but you have never taken the time to prove this claim. It seems strange to me that you would be privy to such information that could prove your case but choose to withhold it. It seems more likely that you are telling us porkies again.
Here you go again. How exactly were his human rights violated?
Did they rush things through? I don’t think that they did.
By accounts he was here for six years, most of which was spent acting in contravention to the laws here. When he was finally given a deportation order he was given the standard two week warning. He then appealed and was given a further extension to remain here. Where is the rush? It seems pretty standard to me.
Once again, we don’t know that Scott did anything illegal but he most certainly did act in contravention to his purpose for being in Taiwan. Assuming that there were also illegal activities involved then the police most likely chose to pursue him for the visa matter as it was easier and quicker. At the end of the day it would have been far better for Scott also. Afterall it is better to be deported, than to be arrested, incarcerated, and then deported!