Archive for the National Endowment for Democracy Category

CIA’s Hidden Hand in ‘Democracy’ Groups: Freedom House and Nat’l Endowment for Democracy []

Posted in CIA, National Endowment for Democracy, US Government Cover-up, US imperialism, USA on January 17, 2015 by Zuo Shou / 左手

Jan 8, 2014

Special Report: Documents from the Reagan presidential library reveal that two major institutions promoting “democracy” and “freedom” — Freedom House and National Endowment for Democracy — worked hand-in-glove, behind-the-scenes, with a CIA propaganda expert in the 1980s, reports Robert Parry…

Excerpted; full article link:

Original article title — “CIA’s Hidden Hand in ‘Democracy’ Groups”

Hong Kong protests: Why imperialists support ‘democracy’ movement [Workers World]

Posted in Anti-China media bias, Anti-China propaganda exposure, Anti-communism, Bourgeois parliamentary democracy, Capitalist media double standard, China, China-bashing, CPC, Hong Kong, National Endowment for Democracy, State Department, U.K., US Agency for International Development, US imperialism, USA, USA 21st Century Cold War on October 14, 2014 by Zuo Shou / 左手

By Sara Flounders on October 7, 2014

Demonstrations in Hong Kong, China, raising demands on the procedures to be followed in city elections in 2017, have become an international issue and a source of political confusion.

The protests, called Occupy Central, have received enormous and very favorable U.S. media coverage. Every news report describes with great enthusiasm the occupation of central business parts of Hong Kong as “pro-democracy” protests. The demonstrations, which began on Sept. 22, gained momentum after Hong Kong police used tear gas to open roads and government buildings.

In evaluating an emerging movement it is important to look at what political forces are supporting the movement. What are the demands raised by the movement, who are they appealing to, and what is the social composition of those in motion?

The U.S. and British governments have issued statements of support for the demonstrations. Secretary of State John Kerry urged Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi to heed the demands of the protesters. Wang responded by calling for respect for China’s sovereignty. Britain, which stole Hong Kong from China in 1842 and held it as a colony for 155 years under a government appointed by London, is supporting the call for “democracy” in Hong Kong. Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg summoned the Chinese ambassador in order to convey the British government’s alarm.

At the present time these imperialists may not expect to overturn the central role of the Chinese Communist Party in governing China. But Occupy Central in Hong Kong is a battering ram, aimed at weakening the role of the state in the Chinese economy.

The imperialists hope to embolden the bourgeois elements and encourage the increasingly strong capitalist class within China to become more aggressive and demand the overturn of socialist norms established after the 1949 socialist revolution, including the leading role of the Communist Party in a strong sovereign state.

= Police repression: Mexico, Italy, Philippines =

In Mexico, tens of thousands of students have been protesting curriculum changes and new fees. More than 50,000 demonstrated in Mexico City for the third time. In western Mexico, 57 students from a teaching college went missing after gunslingers fired on a demonstration they were attending, killing three students and wounding three others. A Guerrero official says witnesses identified the shooters as local police officers. Mass graves have now been uncovered in an area terrorized by police and gangs.

On Oct. 2, in Naples, Italy, national police attacked demonstrators protesting against austerity and a meeting of the European Central Bank. Cops fired tear gas and water canons at thousands of protesters.

Thousands of courageous demonstrators in Manila opposed the signing of an agreement with the U.S. for an escalating rotation of U.S. troops, ships and planes into the Philippines during President Obama’s visit last April. They faced water cannons, tear gas and mass arrests.

Did any White House officials meet with Mexican officials to express concern for the killed or missing students? Did any British officials summon Italian officials to convey alarm at the tear gas and water cannons? Was there world media attention to the attacks on Philippine youth? Where was the media frenzy?

Why is it so dramatically different regarding Occupy Central in Hong Kong?

The use of tear gas by Hong Kong police is denounced by the same officials who have been silent as militarized police in U.S. cities routinely use not only tear gas but tanks, armored personnel carriers, live ammunition, electric tasers, rubber bullets, stun guns, dogs and drones in routine police sweeps.

To hear U.S. officials denouncing restrictions on candidates in Hong Kong is especially offensive to anyone familiar with the election procedures in the U.S. today. Millions of dollars are required to run a campaign here. Candidates go through multiple layers of vetting by corporate powers and by the two pro-imperialist political party apparatuses. Restrictive ballot measures are in place in every state and city election.

= ‘Color revolutions’ =

Officials and publications in China characterize the actions of Occupy Central as a U.S.-funded “color revolution” and compare it to the upheavals that swept Ukraine and former Soviet republics.

Several commentaries have described in some detail the extensive role of the U.S. National Endowment for Democracy and the Democratic National Institute, along with corporate foundations’ funding of leaders and the protest movement in Hong Kong.

Thousands of nongovernmental organizations with large staffs are based in Hong Kong. Their stated goal is to build democracy. Their real purpose is to undermine the central role of the Chinese Communist Party in the organization of Chinese society. Hong Kong, unlike the rest of China, has allowed these U.S.-funded NGOs and political associations almost unlimited access for decades…

Excerpted; full article link:

Articles copyright 1995-2014 Workers World. Verbatim copying and distribution is permitted in any medium without royalty provided this notice is preserved.

US Openly Approves Hong Kong Chaos it Created [Land Destroyer Report]

Posted in Anti-China propaganda exposure, Anti-communism, Beijing, China, China-bashing, China-US relations, Hong Kong, National Endowment for Democracy, State Department, U.K., Ukraine, US Government Cover-up, US imperialism, USA, USA 21st Century Cold War on October 1, 2014 by Zuo Shou / 左手

by Tony Cartalucci

Sept. 30, 2014

September 30, 2014 (Tony Cartalucci – LD) – The “Occupy Central” protests in Hong Kong continue on – destabilizing the small southern Chinese island famous as an international hub for corporate-financier interests, and before that, the colonial ambitions of the British Empire. Those interests have been conspiring for years to peel the island away from Beijing after it was begrudgingly returned to China in the late 1990’s, and use it as a springboard to further destabilize mainland China.

Behind the so-called “Occupy Central” protests, which masquerade as a “pro-democracy” movement seeking “universal suffrage” and “full democracy,” is a deep and insidious network of foreign financial, political, and media support. Prominent among them is the US State Department and its National Endowment for Democracy (NED) as well as NED’s subsidiary, the National Democratic Institute (NDI).

Now, the US has taken a much more overt stance in supporting the chaos their own manipulative networks have prepared and are now orchestrating. The White House has now officially backed “Occupy Central.” Reuters in its article, “White House Shows Support For Aspirations Of Hong Kong People,” would claim:

The White House is watching democracy protests in Hong Kong closely and supports the “aspirations of the Hong Kong people,” White House spokesman Josh Earnest said on Monday. ”

The United States supports universal suffrage in Hong Kong in accordance with the Basic Law and we support the aspirations of the Hong Kong people,” said Earnest, who also urged restraint on both sides.

= US State Department Has Built Up and Directs “Occupy Central” =

Earnest’s comments are verbatim the demands of “Occupy Central” protest leaders, but more importantly, verbatim the long-laid designs the US State Department’s NDI articulates on its own webpage dedicated to its ongoing meddling in Hong Kong. The term “universal suffrage”and reference to “Basic Law” and its “interpretation” to mean “genuine democracy” is stated clearly on NDI’s website which claims:

The Basic Law put in place a framework of governance, whereby special interest groups, or “functional constituencies,” maintain half of the seats in the Legislative Council (LegCo). At present, Hong Kong’s chief executive is also chosen by an undemocratically selected committee. According to the language of the Basic Law, however, “universal suffrage” is the “ultimate aim.” While “universal suffrage” remains undefined in the law, Hong Kong citizens have interpreted it to mean genuine democracy.

To push this agenda – which essentially is to prevent Beijing from vetting candidates running for office in Hong Kong, thus opening the door to politicians openly backed, funded, and directed by the US State Department – NDI lists an array of ongoing meddling it is carrying out on the island. It states:

Since 1997, NDI has conducted a series of missions to Hong Kong to consider the development of Hong Kong’s “post-reversion” election framework, the status of autonomy, rule of law and civil liberties under Chinese sovereignty, and the prospects for, and challenges to democratization.

It also claims:

In 2005, NDI initiated a six-month young political leaders program focused on training a group of rising party and political group members in political communications skills.


NDI has also worked to bring political parties, government leaders and civil society actors together in public forums to discuss political party development, the role of parties in Hong Kong and political reform. In 2012, for example, a conference by Hong Kong think tank SynergyNet supported by NDI featured panelists from parties across the ideological spectrum and explored how adopting a system of coalition government might lead to a more responsive legislative process.

NDI also admits it has created, funded, and backed other organizations operating in Hong Kong toward achieving the US State Department’s goals of subverting Beijing’s control over the island:

In 2007, the Institute launched a women’s political participation program that worked with the Women’s Political Participation Network (WPPN) and the Hong Kong Federation of Women’s Centres (HKFWC) to enhance women’s participation in policy-making, encourage increased participation in politics and ensure that women’s issues are taken into account in the policy-making process.

And on a separate page, NDI describes programs it is conducting with the University of Hong Kong to achieve its agenda:

The Centre for Comparative and Public Law (CCPL) at the University of Hong Kong, with support from NDI, is working to amplify citizens’ voices in that consultation process by creating Design Democracy Hong Kong (, a unique and neutral website that gives citizens a place to discuss the future of Hong Kong’s electoral system.

It should be no surprise to readers then, to find out each and every “Occupy Central” leader is either directly linked to the US State Department, NED, and NDI, or involved in one of NDI’s many schemes.

“Occupy Central’s” self-proclaimed leader, Benny Tai, is a law professor at the aforementioned University of Hong Kong and a regular collaborator with the NDI-funded CCPL. In 2006-2007 (annual report, .pdf) he was named as a board member – a position he has held until at least as recently as last year. In CCPL’s 2011-2013 annual report (.pdf), NDI is listed as having provided funding to the organization to “design and implement an online Models of Universal Suffrage portal where the general public can discuss and provide feedback and ideas on which method of universal suffrage is most suitable for Hong Kong.”

Curiously, in CCPL’s most recent annual report for 2013-2014 (.pdf), Tai is not listed as a board member. However, he is listed as participating in at least 3 conferences organized by CCPL, and as heading at least one of CCPL’s projects. At least one conference has him speaking side-by-side another prominent “Occupy Central” figure, Audrey Eu. The 2013-2014 annual report also lists NDI as funding CCPL’s “Design Democracy Hong Kong” website.

Civic Party chairwoman Audrey Eu Yuet-mee, in addition to speaking at CCPL-NDI functions side-by-side with Benny Tai, is entwined with the US State Department and its NDI elsewhere. She regularly attends forums sponsored by NED and its subsidiary NDI. In 2009 she was a featured speaker at an NDI sponsored public policy forum hosted by “SynergyNet,” also funded by NDI. In 2012 she was a guest speaker at the NDI-funded Women’s Centre “International Women’s Day” event, hosted by the Hong Kong Council of Women (HKCW) which is also annually funded by the NDI.

There is also Martin Lee, founding chairman of Hong Kong’s Democrat Party and another prominent figure who has come out in support of “Occupy Central.” Just this year, Lee was in Washington meeting directly with US Vice President Joseph Biden, US Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi, and even took part in an NED talk hosted specifically for him and his agenda of “democracy” in Hong Kong. Lee even has a NED page dedicated to him after he was awarded in 1997 NED’s “Democracy Award.” With him in Washington was Anson Chan, another prominent figure currently supporting the ongoing unrest in Hong Kong’s streets.

= “Occupy Central’s” Very Unpopular Agenda =

If democracy is characterized by self-rule, than an “Occupy Central” movement in which every prominent figure is the benefactor of and beholden to foreign cash, support, and a foreign-driven agenda, has nothing at all to do with democracy. It does have, however, everything to do with abusing democracy to undermine Beijing’s control over Hong Kong, and open the door to candidates that clearly serve foreign interests, not those of China, or even the people of Hong Kong.

What is more telling is the illegal referendum “Occupy Central” conducted earlier this year in an attempt to justify impending, planned chaos in Hong Kong’s streets. The referendum focused on the US State Department’s goal of implementing “universal suffrage” – however, only a fifth of Hong Kong’s electorate participated in the referendum, and of those that did participate, no alternative was given beyond US-backed organizations and their respective proposals to undermine Beijing.

The BBC would report in its article, “Hong Kong democracy ‘referendum’ draws nearly 800,000,” that:

A total of 792,808 voters took part in an unofficial referendum on universal suffrage in Hong Kong, organisers said.

The 10-day poll was held by protest group Occupy Central.

Campaigners want the public to be able to elect Hong Kong’s leader, the chief executive. The Hong Kong government says the vote has no legal standing.

About 42% of voters backed a proposal allowing the public, a nominating committee, and political parties to name candidates for the top job.

For a protest movement that claims it stands for “democracy,” implied to mean the will of the people, it has an unpopular agenda clearly rejected by the vast majority of Hong Kong’s population – and is now disrupting vital parts of the island, holding the population and stability hostage to push its agenda. All of this is being orchestrated and supported by the United States, its State Department, and its network of global sedition operating under NED and its subsidiary NDI.

While the Western media shows mobs of “thousands” implying that “the people” support ongoing chaos in Hong Kong’s streets, “Occupy Central’s” own staged, illegal referendum proves it does not have the backing of the people and that its agenda is rejected both by mainland China and the people of Hong Kong.

Exposing the insidious, disingenuous, foreign-driven nature of “Occupy Central” is important. It is also important to objectively examine each and every protest that springs up around the world. Superficiality cannot “link” one movement to another, one group to hidden special interests. Rather, one must adhere to due diligence in identifying and profiling the leaders, following the money, identifying their true motivations, and documenting their links to special interests within or beyond the borders of the nation the protests are taking place in.

By doing this, movements like “Occupy Central” can be exposed, blunted, and rolled over before the destruction and chaos other US-backed destabilization efforts have exacted elsewhere – namely the Middle East and Ukraine – can unfold in Hong Kong.

Article link:

Venezuela uncovers assassination, coup plot against president [Xinhua]

Posted in Colombia, National Endowment for Democracy, State Department, US Agency for International Development, US imperialism, USA, USA 21st Century Cold War, Venezuela on June 1, 2014 by Zuo Shou / 左手

CARACAS, May 28 (Xinhua) — Venezuelan authorities Wednesday said they uncovered a plot by opposition leaders, international financiers and officials backed by the U.S. State Department to assassinate President Nicolas Maduro and take over the country.

At a press conference, top socialist leader and mayor of the capital Caracas Jorge Rodriguez denounced the “complex plan” to assassinate Maduro and unleash a spiral of violence in the country to justify foreign intervention.

Rodriguez said the plot, financed by “a multimillion-dollar fund” that has backed different anti-government actions since February, was led by Venezuelan banker Eligio Cedeno, a fugitive from justice in Venezuela.

The mayor also accused former rightwing [sic] deputy Maria Corina Machado of being behind the schemes, saying several emails tie her directly to actions aimed at fomenting violent regime change in Venezuela.

In one email, Machado mentions Kevin Whitaker, the U.S. ambassador to Colombia, and says the U.S. has confirmed its support of the political opposition and signaled what new steps should be taken.

“We have a bigger checkbook than the government,” another of Machado’s purported [sic] emails says.

“What we present today is part of a criminal investigation being carried out by the administration of justice, because the Venezuelan opposition aims to destroy the peace and constitutional order of our nation,” said Rodriguez.

Rodriguez asked the U.S. government to clarify whether it knew of Whitaker’s contacts or if the official acted on his own.

He also said the government will be presenting its evidence of a planned military coup in coming days.

Venezuela has been rocked by violent protests since February promoted by hardline opposition leaders demanding that Maduro step down.

The clashes have left 42 dead, 835 injured and led to 2,500 people being detained, according to the Attorney General.

Also Wednesday, Venezuelan deputies rejected a U.S. congressional initiative to apply sanctions against Venezuelan officials accused of violating the human rights of anti-government activists.

Venezuelan National Assembly Deputy Saul Ortega, of the ruling socialist party, said the proposed sanctions were “inofficious,” as U.S. laws “lack jurisprudence” in the South American nation.

In statements made to private TV channel Televen, the lawmakers called the measure “an initiative that exposes U.S. interventionism in Venezuela’s political crisis and the way it finances the opposition, above all violent groups in Venezuela.”

According to Ortega, conservative U.S. legislators campaigning for the sanctions are receiving money from Venezuelan opposition sectors.

“All the anti-Venezuelan groups finance them, they give these lawmakers money,” he said.

The U.S. Congress was set to debate a proposed bill to defend human rights in Venezuela later Wednesday.

The bill would make some 15 million U.S. dollars available to Venezuela’s violent protesters, Ortega added, in addition to the millions more being spent by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), National Endowment for Democracy and other agencies.

Editor: yan

Article link:

US Elections: The Empty Politics of Duopoly []

Posted in Bourgeois parliamentary democracy, George W. Bush, National Endowment for Democracy, Obama, US imperialism, USA, Yemen on November 16, 2012 by Zuo Shou / 左手

by Nile Bowie

Nov. 9, 2012

After months of rhetoric and political campaigning, the smoke has finally cleared on the media frenzy that is the US Presidential Election….Cheering supporters shouted “four more years” as President Obama took to the stage to deliver his victory speech – complete with highly emotional grandiloquence, two mentions of the US military being the strongest in the world, and of course – a joke about the family dog. After an exorbitant $6 billion spent by campaigns and outside groups in the primary, congressional and presidential races, Americans have reelected a president better suited for Hollywood than Washington. A 2010 ruling by the US Supreme Court that swept away limits on corporate contributions to political campaigns has paved the way for the most expensive election in American history, in the midst of an economic crisis nonetheless. [1]

In the nation that gave birth to the marketing concept of branding, it is to be assumed that politicians would eventually adopt the same techniques used to promote consumer products – enter Obama. After eight years under the Bush administration, America desperately needed change. Instead of any meaningful structural reform, America ushered in a global super star [sic] [who] not only resuscitated American prestige, but also masked the continued dominance of deregulators, financiers, and war-profiteers. Obama’s most valuable asset is his brand, and his ability to channel the nostalgia of transformative social movements of the past, while serving as a tabula rasa of sorts to his supporters – an icon of hope who is capable of inspiring the masses and coaxing them into action – despite the Obama administration expanding the disturbing militaristic and domestic surveillance policies so characteristic of the Bush years, and channeling never before seen authority to the executive branch.

The American public at large [sic – the mere 30+% who voted for him?] is captivated by Barack’s contrived media personality…performance, and is therefore reluctant to acknowledge his enthusiastic continuation of the deeply unethical policies of his predecessor. Obama is indeed a leader suited for a new age, one of post-intellectualism and televised spectacle – a time when huge demographics of voters are more influenced by Jay-Z and Katy Perry’s endorsement of Obama over anything of political substance he preaches. [2]

While the US has historically exported “democracy promotion” through institutions like the National Endowment for Democracy (trends that have accelerated under the Obama administration), so few see the American electoral process for what it is – unacceptably expensive, filled with contrived debates, and subject to the kind of meticulous controls that America’s foreign adversaries are accused of presiding over.

A leaked ‘Memorandum of Understanding,’ signed by both the Obama and Romney campaigns, provides unique insight into the nature of the three televised debates, and the extent to which organizers went to prevent the occurrence of any form of unplanned spontaneity. [3] The document outlines how no members of the audience would be allowed to ask follow-up questions to the candidates, how microphones will be cut off right after questions were asked, and how any opportunities for follow-up questions from the crowd would be disregarded. In what was billed as a series of town-hall style debates where members of the community can come together and ask questions that reflect their concerns – in actuality, the two candidates dished out pre-planned responses to pre-approved questions, asked by pre-selected individuals. The political domination of the Republican and Democratic parties over the debates is nowhere more apparent than in the arrest of Green Party Presidential candidate Jill Stein and her running mate, Cheri Honkala, as the two attempted to enter the site of the second presidential debate. [4]

…In her closing statement at [a Russia Today-sponsored 3rd-party] debate, Green Party candidate Jill Stein brought up a significant point:

“They’re 90 million voters who are not coming out to vote in this election, that’s one out of every two voters – that’s twice as many as those who will come out for Barack Obama, and twice the number that will come out for Mitt Romney. Those are voters who are saying ‘No’ to politics as usual, and ‘No’ to the Democratic and Republican parties. Imagine if we got out word to those 90 millions [sic] voters, that they actually have a variety of choices and voices in this election.”

American presidential politics are not devoid of progressive voices, but in reality, America doesn’t need a third-party – it needs a second party. The overwhelming lack of choice offered by this election can only be attributable to the political duopoly of the Republican and Democratic parties. As President Obama begins his second term and final term, some feel that this could be a chance for the White House to pursue more progressive ends – an opportunity for Obama to act on his own campaign rhetoric and roll back militarism and the influence of Wall St. financers. While such optimism may prevail in the minds of many, the fact that President Obama issued a drone strike that killed three people in Yemen just hours after being reelected is a telling sign of things to come from the Obama administration. [7] As the United States continues to project itself around the world as the definitive model of “freedom and democracy,” it is apparent that the central bankers, corporate financiers, and crony capitalists who control America’s electoral system did indeed learn and thing or two from communism:

“The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves.” – Vladimir Ilyich Lenin

Full article link, with footnote references:

“Why CCTV Yang Rui Must Not Quit Despite Criticisms Mostly From The West” – on backlash from al-Jazeera’s Melissa Chan expulsion [The 4th Media]

Posted in Africa, Al Jazeera bias, distortion and lies, Anti-China media bias, Anti-China propaganda exposure, Beijing, China, Indonesia, Japan, National Endowment for Democracy, Philippines, South China Sea, Vietnam on June 18, 2012 by Zuo Shou / 左手

by Yoichi Shimatsu

May 25, 2012

…[CCTV ‘Dialogue’ host] Yang Rui used the word “shrew” to describe the anti-Cihna reporter Melissa Chan and not “bitch” as reported, and it is true that her reporting fixated on and became hysterical about abuses in China, which in most cases are no different and often of lesser degree than similar problems in Western countries or other developing economies. Balance was not her act.

Yang Rui criticized some Jews not all, and do not some Jews support the bombing of civilians in Gaza? Are Jews above criticism? And on what grounds – that they were chosen by their God? If so, God has chosen to treat quite badly at times, which presents a major ethical questions about the Jewish God. No, the fact is Jews are not better than the rest of us and not above criticism.

Yang Rui is harsh on anti-China elements, who do in fact act in a conspiratorial manner…in the name of democracy, but in reality did it for their own self-interest and privileges…

…the critics are not putting a few objectionable characterizations in the context of a larger body of writing and analysis. Yang Rui is among the best interviewers in Asia, and certainly not a tenth as biased as the popular Rush Limbaugh or Bill O’Reilly in the USA.

The foreign critics of Yang Rui use far more abusive and obscene language than he ever does to denounce Yang Rui and not just him.

The four-letter word is standard parlance among the Twitteratti.

Most of this critics are – and this is my opinion, if I am free to say it – self-centered yuppies who came to exploit China and follow lifestyle choices inappropriate to Chinese morals, and by that I mean…promoting dissent with no well-founded philosophy or legal grounds as foreigners…

Many are the children of wealthy parents, or they would not be able to afford the bohemian joy ride in an increasingly expensive Beijing.

Thus, it turns out that Yang Rui, like Shakespeare, has captured an unpleasant part of the social reality and describes it appropriately – because there is no nice and proper way to describe foreign trash, of which too much has flooded into China.

Since some of this foreign trash behaves not like professional journalists but like tawdry yellow-journalism sensationalists, their credentials and writings need to be reviewed and if found lacking in reason and fact, and suffering from racist attitudes against Chinese people, their visas should be revoked and entry into China denied forever.

Given its century of sheer abuse from the Western powers and Japan, China has every right to demand respect from foreign guests, especially professional journalists.

Of course, we (I am one of the professional journalists) have our differences in viewpoint, interest and ideology, but our conduct in China should reflect a basic understanding of the terrible ill-treatment that the Chinese people suffered from our own countries’ demands and interventions.

The foreign bloggers complain about the anti-foreign backlash in Beijing as equivalent to the Boxer Rebellion. I have news for your wilting flowers – you have seen nothing yet.

I have put up with a few waves of anti-Japanese sentiment and even riots in China, and while I oppose such nationalistic activity because I am personally threatened by it, it is important also to realize the context and background of the memories that trigger the anti-foreign feelings and which side, in fact, has been the greater offender.

Countries like China, Vietnam, the Philippines, Indonesia and most of Africa and Latin America have been the victims of Western colonialism. Citizens from powerful countries, even if we as individuals are not powerful ourselves, need to remember the historical inequality of the relationship and the countless crimes that were committed to benefit the our homelands at the expense of other peoples.

Though I am from the Vietnam War generation, which saw the terrible crimes against the Southeast Asian people, I expect no less respect to be shown by the younger generation of Americans, Europeans and Japanese who come to China.

The narcissicism of the Facebook generation is simply no excuse for feigned ignorance and nonchalant arrogance, as shown in the feigned outrage against Yang Rui. Grow up, kids, and admit you say far worse things about Chinese and other people of color.

While white young adults should learn a modicum of humility in the “real world”, I am equally disgusted by young Asian-Americans who pathetically act like a bunch of bananas, aping their white classmates. You not only fail as journalists, you fail as humans for your racial self-hatred.

The last thing that needs to be pointed out is the gutlessness of the younger reporters, who like Melissa Chan take only cheap shots at Chinese society at the behest of their editorial masters, and never dare really confront the powers that be on issues that count. Without the NED and its corps of paid propagandistic NGOs, you would be nowhere and have nothing to report.

Yes, continue believing that China is the bad guy and the Western corporations and bankers are not here to exploit the Chinese people.

Yes, continue your self-deception that the Chinese are the aggressors and not the Western oil companies that control the oil reserves of the South China Sea and Andaman Sea.

Continue believing in the myths they fed you at the Ivy League.

And then go home, and see what a crap place it’s become for the majority of American, European and Japanese citizens – and try to blame that on the Chinese, you pack of whingers.

For me, Yang Rui has been a professional peer and a challenger across the interview table, and he has fired many a shot at me and we have often been at great odds.

But after the vile abuse he has endured in reaction to some frank statements he made on his personal blog, which do reflect some of the unpleasant realities of contemporary society – and the contempt shown toward HIS freedom of expression – I now see him as both a friend and an important and incisive voice in the international dialogue.

When the rest of you grow up, you might understand what I am saying.

By Yoichi Shimatsu, former editor at The Japan Times Weekly and Pacific News Service

Article link:

“China-Japan relations tolerate no double-dealing” – Insult of Japan hosting NED-supported Kadeer and ‘World Uyghur Congress’ [People’s Daily]

Posted in Beijing, China, Japan, National Endowment for Democracy, south Korea, USA, Xinjiang on May 17, 2012 by Zuo Shou / 左手

By Zheng Xiwen (People’s Daily)
May 17, 2012

Edited and Translated by People’s Daily Online

With strong instigation of the right-wing force, Japanese government had openly allowed the “World Uyghur Congress” to convene the so-called “Fourth Representative Conference” in Japan on May 14, giving the green light for such anti-China separatists as Rebiya Kadeer and Dolkun Isa. With the leading of Japanese right-wing politicians, these anti-China separatists also visited the Yasukuni Shrine. Japan advocates to strengthen the public opinion basis to develop the bilateral relations on one hand but on the other hand it connives to the acts that seriously damage mutual political trust. Such a behavior has aroused strong indignation among Chinese people.

The Japanese government did all the sophistries to shirk its responsibility, saying that it cannot intervene in the normal political activities; it is lawful to hold the “Fourth Representative Conference of the World Uyghur Congress” and visit the Yasukuni Shrine in Japan; Japan cannot prohibit these anti-China separatists’ entry because they held valid documents. All of these are obvious excuses. The behavior of Japan not only seriously hurt the feelings of Chinese people but also damaged its own international image.

Japan must know that the “World Uyghur Congress” is an anti-China separatist group. It often provokes the national antagonism in China and had participated in the planning of a series of terrorist activities…Interpol had issued the red arrest warrant to its key leaders. The group can be [called[ notorious. In order to please extreme Japanese right-wing members and create tension to China-Japan relations, the “World Uyghur Congress” members visited the Yasukuni Shrine, which enshrines the class-A war criminals that had launched militarism aggression against China and slaughtered numerous Chinese people.

To such a vicious organization, Japan should stick to principles and keep the most basic sense of right and wrong, rather than join them and provide stage for them to make troubles. It is said that the meeting of anti-China separatists was also supported by the U.S. National Endowment for Democracy.

Currently, the East Asian cooperation is in the ascendant and the world has paid more attention to the development of the Asia-Pacific region. The fifth meeting of the leaders of China, Japan and South Korea has just ended in Beijing. They decided to sign a three-country investment agreement and the negotiation of three-country free trade zone will be launched in 2012, all of which indicate a bright future of East Asian cooperation.

However, the lack of mutual political trust between China and Japan has brought negative influence to China-Japan cooperation. For example, compared with the China-ROK cooperation, the earlier China-Japan cooperation began lagging behind. Therefore, Japan should rethink profoundly and correct their wrong acts to strengthen the mutual trust and mutual beneficial China-Japan cooperation.

China hopes that Japan, which was the first to open the process of modernization in East Asia, can see clearly the trend of the world, conform to the development and change of times, make right judgment and choices and create a better environment for the China-Japan relations.

Read the Chinese version: 发展中日关系不能面上合作背后使绊 [for link, go to below address]

Article link: