2010 Nobel Peace Laureate the Worst Choice Nobel Peace Committee Ever Made?

The below is the full text from October 8th’s website announcement of US government-running, -funded, and -sponsored National Endowment for Democracy (NED) in regard to Liu Xiaobo the 2010 Nobel Peace Laureate. It proudly says the NED has financed Liu for years:

“The NED extends its warmest congratulations to grantee Liu Xiaobo on receiving the Nobel Peace Prize. The NED joins democrats and human rights defenders in China and around the world in congratulating Charter 08 co-organizer Liu Xiaobo on receiving the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize. Liu Xiaobo’s intellectual independence, moral courage, and thoughtful advocacy of democratic approaches to China’s challenges have won him deep respect in his own country and abroad. Among his many contributions to the advance of democratic ideas and values in China have been his work as editor of Democratic China magazine (English via Google Translate) for several years until his arrest in 2008, and serving two terms as President of the Independent Chinese PEN Center, from 2003 to 2007. NED is pleased to have been able to provide grant support to both organizations for their activities supporting free inquiry and freedom of expression over the years. NED unites with supporters of fundamental human rights worldwide in calling for Liu Xiaobo’s release from prison and for respect for freedom of association, freedom of assembly, and freedom of the press in China.”

According to Wikipedia, the NED is as follows:

“The National Endowment for Democracy, or NED, is a U.S. non-profit organization that was founded in 1983 to promote US-friendly democracy by providing cash grants funded primarily through an annual allocation from the U.S. Congress. Although administered as a private organization, its funding comes almost entirely from a governmental appropriation by Congress and it was created by an act of Congress…. It has been accused by both right-wing and left-wing personalities of interference in foreign regimes and of being set up to legally continue the CIA’s prohibited activities of support to selected political parties abroad.”

What do the two above-quoted excerpts mean to you? As simple and clear as plainly stated in the above NED announcement, Mr. Liu Xiaobo, doubtlessly, can be certainly called a CIA paid agent who’s been financed for years through American government’s “non-profit organization [called, the NED] to promote US-friendly democracy” around the world. This characterization by identifying Liu as a US government agent is an act of neither leftist’s nor rightist’s political propaganda. It seems no more further arguments to find out who really is Liu Xiaobo are needed! Around the world, many people have questioned about his so-called “intellectual independence, moral courage, and thoughtful advocacy of democratic approaches to China’s challenges,” as NED proudly claims, if his political convictions and commitments he has aspired to for over 20 years in regard to so-called the “universal principles for freedom and human rights,” as reportedly-known, globally-publicized, and enthusiastically-praised by the Western and American mainstream media, are genuine.

A simple answer to that question is NO! Then who is he? One can unhesitatingly conclude he’s been simply paid for his service (or “dirty work”) of the interests of American government for many years. The way of payments American government has made in order to continuously hire a so-called “Chinese political dissident” is as hypocritical, deceitful, and disguised as America’s most other similar cases like Dalai Lama in the name of “freedom, democracy, and human rights.” It’s business as usual! Was the decision of 2010 Nobel Peace Prize one of the worst and hypocritical cases Nobel Peace Committee made in its history? Answer seems “YES,” unfortunately! The deeper and the more we know about Liu Xiaobo, the firmer our answer can be. Was this Nobel thing in 2010 also a business as usual? It seems so!

According to Mr. Yoichi Shimatzu, former Editor of Japan Times and Senior Advisor for The Fourth Media, a English Website of April Media Group, “Liu’s [annual] salary (untaxed since it went unreported to the China Tax Agency) from NED was USD $650,000” for his role as “President of Independent Chinese PEN Center.” Liu also received “USD $1,800 a month for his editorship” of a [US government-funded] magazine Democratic China and “plus [unknown figures of] project budgets.”

Is it a surprise for us? The answer is again NO! This seems one of the most typical methods US government has used/employed for its many clandestinely-hired secret foreign agents in many different parts of the world, as in the case of Liu Xiaobo in China.

Anyway, with his extraordinary incomes with unbelievably enormous amounts of money for that many years he’d received in the name of the “grant” through the NED, i.e., US government, I wonder if he had not become already a millionaire, I mean Liu is a very (very!) rich man.

It’s even impossible to make simple comparisons that sort of huge income he makes with that of ordinary Chinese or any other ordinary peoples around the globe. It’s simply way too much! No matter how he argues, defends and justifies, he’s been living on a CIA (i.e., US government) payroll system through the NED account. Those huge incomes, just like as huge as Chinese population, were the rewards for his extraordinary hypocrisy for the sake of US government’s ill-willed attempts to demonize his own country for more than 20 years. In that sense, he can be certainly another Dalai Lama, since they now, both, became the “honorable” Nobel Peace Prize winners! Anyway, someone can argue he has simply sold out and betrayed his own country in exchange for those hugely enormous amounts of money, but definitely not for the sake of so-called “freedom, democracy and human rights” of his country, as he’s been announced by the Nobel Peace Award Committee in 2010.

Let me finish this short column by sharing an interesting statement Mr. Allen Weinstein made in February 2005 at his Senate Confirmation Testimony for a new job as “Archivist of the US Government.” He calls himself, like Liu, a “global democracy activist” but, most importantly, “helped the foundation of the NED”:

“A lot of what we do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA.” (Weinstein)

Like an Appendix, for your information, I am going to share with the Fourth Media readers some of Liu’s own words Mr. Shimatzu has diligently researched from Liu Xiaobo’s file which seems like a full of garbage. I am quite interested to find out how Fourth Media readers’ reactions to Liu’s “amazing” statements would be look like:

1. On Bush’s war of terror: “布什在反恐上的卓越作为,绝非克里的诋毁所能抹杀”: Bush’s excellent accomplishment in anti-terror is something [US Senator] Kerry absolutely cannot negate.

2. On the Iraq war: “布什政府的先发制人战略是正确的选择”: Bush administration’s ‘preemptive strike’ strategy is the right choice!

3. “无论如何, 倒萨之战是正义的! 布什总统的决定是正确的!”: No matter what, the anti-Saddam war is righteous! President Bush’s decision is a right one!

4. On Islam: “虽然, 我们不能把伊斯兰原教旨的恐怖主义视为继法西斯和共产主义… 但有一点是明确无误的: 产生这种威胁的文化及制度根源, 必定是极为不宽容且嗜血的.”: Thou, we should not view Islam’s teaching on terrorism in the same vein as fascism and communism… but this is obvious: a culture and [religious] system that produced this threat, must be extremely intolerant and blood thirsty.

5. “邱吉尔的真正传人布莱尔”: Blair, the True Successor to Churchill” – February 18, 2003, http://www.boxun.com/hero/liuxb/54_1.shtml

6. “倒萨之战与联合国权威”: War to Topple Saddam and the United Nations’ Authority”- March 18, 2003, http://www.boxun.com/hero/liuxb/65_1.shtml

7. “美英自由联盟必胜”: U.S. and England Freedom Coalition Must Win”- April 11, 2004, http://www.boxun.com/hero/liuxb/133_1.shtml

8. See more from http://www.slate.com/id/2161800/:

For examples:

古罗马智者西塞罗说:“为了自由,我们才服从法律”。当下的国际秩序也要求:“为了自由,我们才尊重权威”。当联合国无法履行保障基本人权的职责时,其权 威就不值得尊重。在此意义上,一个对内实施恐怖暴政和对外犯过侵略战争罪的政府,无权要求建立在《世界人权宣言》的道义合法性基础上的联合国给予它和平的 民主的对待,更没有理由要求联合国制止对其发动的正义之战。


“A wise Roman, Cicero, once said, “for freedom, we obey the law.” The present international order also requires: “for freedom, we respect power and authority.” When the United Nations is unable to perform the duty of protecting fundamental human rights, its power and authority is not worthy of respect. A government that has carried out domestic tyranny and foreign aggression has no right to request the United Nations, which was built on the foundation of the moral legitimacy the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, to accord it peaceful democratic treatment, and further, and has no reasonable basis to request the United Nations to stop the launch of a just war against it.” (http://www.boxun.com/hero/liuxb/65_1.shtml)

Or this one:

当布什和布莱尔领导的自由力量为铲除邪恶而付出巨大代价时,只会巧舌如簧的希拉克说不定获得了诺贝尔和平奖。然而,我相信,历史终将证明布什和布莱尔的英 明,正如历史曾经证明了邱吉尔和罗斯福的英明一样。真该为这个地球庆幸,因为,人类之拥有以自由价值为核心的现代文明,主要靠英美两国之力。英国是现代文 明的母体,美国是现代文明的集大成者。以英美为代表的自由制度,以其善待人性的仁慈而在21世纪成为人类文明的主流。

“When Bush and Blair’s liberal forces are trying to eradicate evil at great cost, only the glib perhaps [would suggest antiwar] Jacques Chirac should win the Nobel Peace Prize. However, I believe that history will eventually prove Bush’s and Blair’s wisdom, as history has proven Churchill’s and Roosevelt’s wisdom. The world is really glad for this, because the value of human freedom at the core of modern civilization mainly depends on the strength of Britain and America. Britain is the mother of modern civilization [and] the United States is a master of modern civilization. Freedom as represented by the Anglo-American system, with its benevolence and kindness to humanity in the 21st century, is the mainstream of human civilization.” (http://www.boxun.com/hero/liuxb/65_1.shtml)


“In human history, there has never been a war to eradicate tyranny such as the war against Saddam, that started so fast, fought so civilized, and won so neatly!”

西方的左派们可以抓住暂时的挫折来大做文章, 但在历史过去多年之后,人们才会象事后谈论二战初期的邱吉尔和冷战时期的里根一样,以“具有大智慧的大战略家”来评价布什总统。 无论倒萨的行动要冒的多大风险,不行动的风险将更为巨大,二战和9•11就是明证! 所以,无论如何,倒萨之战是正义的!布什总统的决定是正确的!

“The leftwing in the West will spill a lot of words seizing upon these temporary setbacks, but when the history of these last few years is written, people will talk about them just as they talked about Churchill after the Second World War, and Reagan after the Cold War Churchill, and accord the evaluation of “the great strategist with great wisdom” to President Bush. No matter how risky were the actions taken to topple of Saddam, the risk of inaction will be even greater — World War II and 9-11 are proof! Therefore, no matter what, the war to topple Saddam is a just war! President Bush’s decision was correct!” (http://www.boxun.com/hero/liuxb/217_2.shtml)

(About the author: Mr. Kiyul Chung who holds his PhD from Temple University, PA, in USA is now teaching as Adjunct Professor at School of Journalism and Communication, Tsinghua University in Beijing, China. He also works as Editor-in-chief of The Fourth Media, English Website for the April Media Group, www.M4Relay.com)

Sharing is caring!

Leave a Reply