As the UN is the gathering point of almost all of the nations and peoples of the world and their cultures, societies, civilizations, maintaining some equilibrium is always a mighty task.

But when the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights finds any reason to avoid attending any Nobel Peace Prize award ceremony, it's high time for the democracies of the world to get behind a person who will stand up for and aggressively pursue human rights, especially when the award ceremony is to an advocate of peaceful, gradual evolution of the PRC to democracy, democratic governance, society.

The incumbent High Commissioner is a low profile coward. She need to be removed forthwith for Cause.

Yes, refuse to accept criticism of your ultimate system of autocracy and plutocratic rule. Don't only attack anyone whose views vary from yours, just go ahead and bite off their heads.

Citizens of Western liberal democracies have the freedom to advocate a radical change of their form of government, to in fact overthrow it. This is Liu Xiaobo's 'crime' in the CCP/PRC. In the US citizens every day advocate the overthrow of the US Government and no one is even charged for the exercise of this precise such free speech. In the fascist censoring CCP/PRC, this is strictly and hysterically disallowed, indeed forcefully prohibited.

Which systems have the greater confidence in themselves and in their citizenry? Obviously, the West, which in its modernity is far more confident in itself and in its citizenry than are the reactionary dictators of the CCP, the autocrats, oligarchs, elitists and corrupt moral degenerates that they are.

Indeed, tell us about justice. You know it all.

You seem to be a pretty ardent critic of the CPC, they should award you the Nobel prize! After all, all it takes to become a Nobel peace laureate is to be a critic of the CPC right?

I'm not Chinese, I don't live in an eastern country, and the regime my country has adopted is often considered as one of the western type. So don't get sanctimonious on me. By being skeptical of the Nobel Assembly's intentions, I'm not in any manner acting in a self-serving way.

As for China, I believe in this: that when or if China's society becomes sufficiently prosperous, when it no longer suffers from perilous internal rifts, when the whole Chinese population begins to think of itself as part of a whole nation instead as a multitude of groups forcefully united under the same political entity - when those things take place, then China will make a transition into a more liberal form of government. When strong authority is no longer needed, it tends to wane away. And the reverse is also true: when a formerly liberal society begins to think of itself as endangered, then it becomes more authoritarian. The selfconfidence you praise in your post is clearly being shaken in most western countries today. Thus we can see them becoming - slowly but unmistakably - less liberal and more authoritarian. If the US is so selfconfident, why then are US politicians so willing to tag Wikileaks as a danger to their country's national security - so willing, indeed, that they are pushing to censor wikileaks entirely? Democracy is not about morality. It is a natural development in a country's political system, one that becomes more possible depending on certain variables of internal stability. Western countries like to moralize this discussion because that serves their interests. And Xiaobo was awarded that prize because he's a useful propaganda tool against a rival of Western society. He has said himself that western domination of a 3rd World country might be a good thing if it later leads to democracy. Considering the history of colonization by western countries, one can dispute how compatible such a position is with human rights.

The CCP/PRC is living in terror because Manning's leaks include soon to be published diplomatic and intelligence cables that will have reports on June 3, 1989 and June 5th, 1989, which are the day before and the day after the June 4th massacre by the People's 'Liberation' Army of unarmed civilian democracy demonstrators in Tienaman Square and of a significant number of the unarmed civilian population of Beijing by the Dung [sic] Xiao Peng CCP. (He was a very short man, little Dung.)

If the CCP/PRC wants Manning recognized as a Nobel Laureate, it would have to dismiss itself from its dictatorial dynastic rule of China. So you had indeed better hope the Nobel Peace Committee would not recognize Manning because Manning would also have blown the whistle on the fascist murderers in Zhongnanhai.

Yes, we can be certain we will not see such an award. For one thing, Manning is a one-off, one time one shot guy. Unlike Liu Xiaobo, Manning hasn't any history or record of peaceful advocacy of peaceful means, personal commitment to peace, human rights or democracy . Presently Manning is a free radical who is unknown, unpredictable. I'm sure Manning will be treated more gently by the US justice system for his one shot but revealing disclosures of confidential information than Liu Xiaobo among others have been treated by the Beijing CCP which has imprisoned Liu often, regularly and for long desolate terms in remote and forbidding prisons.

In the CCP Liu is a criminal. Soon to be in the CCP, Manning also will be branded a criminal against the state. Two enemies of the CCP/PRC state. More power to them both.

Reading your comments I am not sure whether you are really naive or just pretending to be. What's the point of grasping at straws? Mentioning what the Chinese government did to the student protesters won't mitigate what the US government did to the Afghanistan/Iraqi civilians. If anything the US killed far more innocent civilians in the last few years.

Chinese government, like the US government and most other governments (other than Israel) has been against Wikileaks from the very start. So I doubt it wants to see Manning getting the Nobel Peace Prize. This is consistent with the Chinese government's pro-censorship stance. The US governments on the other hand complains about China's censorship, yet when someone comes along and lifts the dirt on the US government then it does whatever it can to censor Wikileaks and its founder. This is hypocrisy.

The non-hypocritical thing to do is to view both Liu and Manning as heroes or traitors.

Identify one country's government that doesn't have laws which protect its national security or its confidential or internal privileged work product communications. This is true in matters of everyday diplomacy, extraordinary diplomacy, vital intelligence, sensitive intergovernmental negotiations past and present etc etc.

During the Vietnam War the historic Pentagon Papers which provided the internal, confidential history of US involvement were illegally provided to news organizations in the United States -- the Washington Post and New York Times in particular. This could not happen in a country such as the PRC which operates under the totalitarian theory of the press/media, but of course and predictably did happen in the United States which chooses the libertarian theory of press/media. The same kind of fit is hitting the shan now in the instance of Wikileaks but much more comprehensively and extensively, i.e., well beyond a single specific event (the US involvement in the Vietnam Civil War).

The deservedly embarrassed US Government in the awkward Pentagon Papers situation went to the independent US courts, up to the Supreme Court, desperately to try to stop publication of the contents of the Papers. Of course, the US Government lost its case in the Supreme Court and the Papers continued to be published to the last page and the their final word. Of course, the US Government will lose its case against Wikileaks in the courts in this instance as well. The principal reason is that in the delicate and sensitive balancing of government secrecy and the exposure of certain government secrets to a democratic people and society, the fact is that democratic society and the sovereignty of the people are ultimate. We will assess, evaluate, analyze and decide in these revealed matters.

In contrast and coming soon from Wikileaks are documents pertaining to the June 6, 1989 massacre of unarmed students and youth in Tienaman Square and their unarmed supporting citizens of Beijing. Knowing this reality, the PRC government already is denouncing Wikileaks, which is oh, so cynically predictable. The difference however between the United States and the People's Republic of China is that these important revelations couldn't conceivably happen in China under any situation or circumstance - none whatsoever. Fascist governments oppress, repress, murderously preclude.

Wikileaks is giving us some truth across the board globally, reasonably, equally and revealingly. Let's watch Zhongnanhai hysterically and wildly lash out when the truth about them is exposed.

Civilian deaths in Afghanistan and Iraq?

Let's talk about the CCP/PRC support of the genocide in Darfour. Yes, the CCP/PRC sponsorship of genocide in Darfour.

Accidental civilian deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan in the defensive and protective efforts to stop terrorists in failed states attacking the United States is a serious matter, to be sure, and the US government is continuously working to reduce accidental civilian casualties in this respect. This is a civil humanitarian consciousness and effort, duly and properly so.

In sharp and stark contrast, the CCP/PRC sponsorship and encouragement of genocide in Darfour is a radically opposite and inhumane policy and purpose. This is the 21st century. Accordingly, genocide is beyond the acceptable or tolerable policy of civilized nations. The CCP/PRC still doesn't get this, just still doesn't get it.

It's a matter of accidents contrasted to CCP/PRC inhumane purposeful policy and cruel design.

The UN a non-political organization?!? Tell us another one. What a stupid statement.

The UN is the most political and politicized organization in the world.

Which is why the reactionary CCP/PRC can pressure it not to send its High Commissioner for Human Rights to a Nobel Peace Prize Presentation Ceremony. The low commissioner needs to be fired forthwith. This particular pressure is unprecedented in UN history so the response to the CCP/PRC pressure needs to be accordingly proportionate - fire her now.

The only precedent for the complete absence of the recipient or a member of his/her close family occurred before the UN was founded and organized. Indeed, the only time in the history of the Nobel Peace Prize Award Presentation Ceremony when neither the recipient nor a member of close family was not allowed to attend to receive the award occurred in 1936.

That was the year Adolph Hitler prohibited and prevented the German Carl von Ossietzky or any close family member from attending to receive the Nobel Peace Prize. Shoot, even the (since collapsed) Soviet Union dissident Andrie Sakharov was allowed to have his wife be present at the Ceremony to accept the Award. Lech Walesa's wife also was allowed to accept the award in his behalf. In 1991 the 18 year old son of Aung San Suu Kyi was allowed to attend to accept the award in his mother's behalf.

So on December 10 in Oslo the recipient's chair on the dias will be in its traditional place but it will be empty. At the request of Liu Xiaobo's friends and family, when Liu Xiaobo is called to receive his award a children's choir will sing as the chair remains eerily vacant of Liu Xiaobo.

The only question at the UN is what is the color of your politics.