Friday, October 9, 2009

Obama wins Nobel Prize for Peace!!

I thought that this was a joke when I saw it this morning. Strangely, it's not. When the Nobel committee gave the award to Al Gore, I commented that the Nobel Prize for Peace had at last become politicized. This latest move seals it.

Here are some worthy people that I think should have received this award and that are certainly far better picks that Barack Obama: Burmese monks whose defiance against, and brutalization at the hands of, the country's military junta captured the attention of the Free World several years ago and continue to bravely resist their government. The prize should have been awarded to Morgan Tsvangirai, Arthur Mutambara and other Zimbabwe opposition leaders who were arrested and in some cases beaten by police back in 2007 while protesting peacefully against dictator Robert Mugabe. The Prize should have gone to Father Nguyen Van Ly, a Catholic priest in Vietnam arrested in 2007 and sentenced to eight years in prison for helping the pro-democracy group Block 8406. The prize should have gone to Wajeha al-Huwaider and Fawzia al-Uyyouni, co-founders of the League of Demanders of Women's Right to Drive Cars in Saudi Arabia, who are waging a modest struggle with grand ambitions to secure basic rights for women in that Muslim country. The prize should have gone to the people of Iraq, who bravely work to rebuild and reunite their country amid constant threats to themselves and their families from terrorists who deliberately target civilians. And finally, if the Nobel committee had any real moral rectitude, it could have awarded the prize to the people of Iran who resisted and protested against a corrupt voting process in their country.

It is pathetic that the Nobel committee chose to give the Peace price to someone who has done nothing to deserve it.

5 comments:

The Keeper Of Odd Knowledge (KOOK) said...

very very well done

askcherlock said...

I wonder...did the committee give the Nobel Peace Prize to Obama, not because he has actually accomplished a fete this year, but because other world leaders have not even attempted to reach out with olive branches and maps for the Beginning of peace? I cannot think of one world leader, besides Obama, who has done that. Many are so embroiled in controversy that it may have been Obama was the only leader with a slate clean enough for recognition. Sometimes it is not so much the accomplishment, but the attempts in a world filled with dissonance.

VH said...

askcherlock: I guess my issue with the Nobel Peace Prize in this instance is that Barack Obama, who took office on the afternoon of January 20th, 2009, is being awarded a Nobel prize in a category where nominations closed on February 1st, 2009. How did the Norwegian committee chose to grant Obama (even taking into account your point) this award when he was President for only about 12 days?

Let's all be honest with ourselves, the "Nobel Peace Prize" is not awarded by sober, objective specialists the way that the scientific Nobels are.

It's basically just a popularity contest among left-wing Norwegian parliamentarians, who dominate the Peace Prize committee. That's all it is. I look at it as if the Democratic Party had decided to give Obama a lifetime achievement award--it's a political award with any real merit.

After this awarding, to pretend that the Peace Prize means anything anymore is ludicrous.

Harrison said...

It's like kids who finish 10th still get a trophy. It was a political choice and a crass one at that.

Jeff Perren said...

Teddy Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, Nicholas Butler (Columbia Pres, cheerleader for dictators in the '30s), Yassir Arafat.... There's a very long list of atrocious picks for this pseudo-Nobel.