Response to Nicholas Kristof

After reading his column from July 8 in New York Times, I found his arrogance unbearable and have to respond. Although there is a comment section there, it is usually censored and full of praise, so I decide to write a rebut here.
As most of us have preconceived biases and opinions on Liu Xiaobo, yet mostly ignorant of his real writings I decide that Wikipedia might be a good place to start. Mr. Kristof compare Liu to Nelson Mandela. Mr. Mandela spent 27 years in jail fighting against colonialism and racism, while Mr. Liu wants China to surrender and subservient to West completely.
“In a 1988 interview with Hong Kong’s Liberation Monthly (now known as Open Magazine), Liu was asked what it would take for China to realize a true historical transformation. He replied:
“[It would take] 300 years of colonialism. In 100 years of colonialism, Hong Kong has changed to what we see today. With China being so big, of course it would require 300 years as a colony for it to be able to transform into how Hong Kong is today. I have my doubts as to whether 300 years would be enough.”[22][23]
Liu admitted in 2006 that the response was extemporaneous, although he did not intend to take it back, as it represented “an extreme expression of his long held belief.”[23] The quote was nonetheless used against him. He has commented, “Even today [in 2006], radical patriotic ‘angry youth’ still frequently use these words to paint me with ‘treason’.”[23]
Known for his pro-West stance, Liu once stated in an interview: “Modernization means whole-sale westernization, choosing a human life is choosing Western way of life. Difference between Western and Chinese governing system is humane vs in-humane, there’s no middle ground… Westernization is not a choice of a nation, but a choice for the human race” [24]”
Now it might seem I am quoting him on his extreme position, he might walk back a little. He did claim, “I must: 1. Use Western civilization as a tool to critique China. 2. Use my own creativity to critique the West.'”[27]”. Yet he did nothing of that sort, as we can see from his opinion on Iraq War.
“Liu also published a 2004 article in support of Bush’s war on Iraq, titled “Victory to the Anglo-American Freedom Alliance”, in which he praised the U.S.-led post-Cold War conflicts as “best examples of how war should be conducted in a modern civilization.” He wrote “regardless of the savagery of the terrorists, and regardless of the instability of Iraq’s situation, and, what’s more, regardless of how patriotic youth might despise proponents of the United States such as myself, my support for the invasion of Iraq will not waver. Just as, from the beginning, I believed that the military intervention of Britain and the United States would be victorious, I am still full of belief in the final victory of the Freedom Alliance and the democratic future of Iraq, and even if the armed forces of Britain and the United States should encounter some obstacles such as those that they are currently facing, this belief of mine will not change.” He predicted “a free, democratic and peaceful Iraq will emerge.”[29] During the 2004 US presidential election, Liu again praised Bush for his war effort against Iraq and condemned Democratic Party candidate John Kerry for not sufficiently supporting the wars in which the U.S. was then involved. He commented on Islamism that, “a culture and (religious) system that produced this kind of threat (Islamic fundamentalism), must be extremely intolerant and blood-thirsty.”
As we look at Iraq today, Libya today, and Syria today, we can see why Mr. Liu is the darling of the neocons and liberals like Mr. Kristof. For them China Dream is a threat to their way of life. A divided, broken China, with pseud-democratic farces like U.S. where presidents are elected with minority votes, where republicans dominates in the House when their vote totals less than Democrats is his beacon. The 1.3 billion Chinese people standing up against poverty is less important than his concept as a savior. It’s sad and certainly a personal tragedy for his family on his liver cancer. The Chinese government has gave him medical parole and allowed German and American specialists to treat him. It was his choice to stay in China, and certainly China is under no obligation to allow him to die in U.S. as an anti-China martyr.