Cidersomerset
30th January 2014, 22:08
Snowden nominated for Nobel Peace Prize
BaM8750YIHc
Published on 29 Jan 2014
National Security Agency whistleblower Edward Snowden has been nominated for
the 2014 Nobel Peace Prize, thanks to two Norwegian lawmakers. Baard Vegard
Solhjell and Snorre Valen cited the public debate and policy changes brought about
by the NSA leaks, saying Snowden "has contributed to a more stable and peaceful
world order." In the meantime, US Attorney General Eric Holder was on Capitol Hill
on Wednesday, where he testified in front of the Senate Judiciary. Senators
questioned Holder on Snowden's revelations about the NSA's controversial
surveillance programs. RT's Liz Wahl updates us on the hearing and the latest leaks
about the secretive spy agency.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://static.guim.co.uk/static/393c1ef7a278ac2ebac56968cf763cc565290452/common/images/logos/the-guardian/news.gif
Edward Snowden nominated for Nobel peace prize
Two Norwegian politicians say NSA whistleblower's actions have led to a 'more
stable and peaceful world order'
Associated Press in Stavanger
theguardian.com, Wednesday 29 January 2014 11.23 GMT
http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2014/1/29/1390994411108/Edward-Snowden-008.jpg
Edward Snowden will be one of scores of names being considered by the Nobel
prizecommittee. Photograph: The Guardian/AFP/Getty Images
Two Norwegian politicians say they have jointly nominated the former National Security
Agency contractor Edward Snowden for the 2014 Nobel peace prize.The Socialist Left
party politicians Baard Vegar Solhjell, a former environment minister, and Snorre Valen
said the public debate and policy changes in the wake of Snowden's whistleblowing
had "contributed to a more stable and peaceful world order".
Being nominated means Snowden will be one of scores of names that the Nobel
committee will consider for the prestigious award.The five-member panel will not
confirm who has been nominated but those who submit nominations sometimes make
them public.
Nominators, including members of national parliaments and governments, university
professors and previous laureates, must enter their submissions by 1 February.
The prize committee members can add their own candidates at their first meeting after
that deadline.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/29/edward-snowden-nominated-nobel-peace-prize
=======================================================
http://www.voltairenet.org/local/cache-vignettes/L400xH200/Alfred-Nobel-Quotes-1-b7c04.jpg
http://www.secretsofthefed.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/OBAMA-KILL-LIST-PEACE-PRIZE-NOBEL.jpg
http://cdn.freedomoutpost.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Nobel-peace-drone-Obama.jpg
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There have been strange winners in the past......
https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSxLmXnSF54OOmUG_VKHfhGrlRUw18URTeNtHWYCyFrWyx4aYuu
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://static1.businessinsider.com/assets/images/logos/Business_Insider.jpg
12 People Who Should Not Have Won The Nobel Peace Prize
http://static4.businessinsider.com/image/519f7384eab8ea461b00002f-50-50/rob-wile.jpg
Rob Wile
Most awards are meaningless, but some are more meaningless than others.
The Nobel Peace Prize, the latest winner of which will be announced tomorrow morning,
is probably first among these equals.
According to Alfred Nobel's will, the Peace Prize is to be given to individuals and
institutions that "have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations,
for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of
peace congresses."
As the world has advanced, the Nobel committee has justifiably stretched its
interpretation of this edict.
But we've found 12 instances where the prize's recipient reveals the Committee to be
short-sighted at best, or naive at worst (and one where the committee itself behaved badly*).
Elihu Root (1912)
Root was awarded for a bunch of different mini-achievements. A decade earlier,
however, he'd been investigated by a Senate committee for overseeing the brutal
repression of the Philippines independence movement while Secretary of War, and the
country remained under U.S. jurisdiction for more than 30 years.
Aristide Briand (1926)
Briand was the French Foreign Affairs Minister. He received the prize for spearheading
the Locarno Treaties.
The treaties fixed the location of Germany's western boarders. But they left its eastern
borders "open to arbitration," meaning weaker Eastern European nations would have to
negotiate the terms of their own existence. Poland's Foreign Affairs Minister in the
1930s would later say of the treaty that "Germany was officially asked to attack the
east, in return for peace in the west."
Briand would also go on to co-author the Kellogg-Briand pact, which had a similarly
short-lived impact.
Frank Kellogg (1928)
In 1928, Kellogg, the U.S. Secretary of State, co-authored a treaty in which the leaders
of all major powers agreed to renounce war.
It seemed like a good idea at the time — World War I was still relatively fresh in
everyone's minds.
But it's now regarded as a bit of a joke, given that just a few years later Germany would
begin violently expanding its borders.
Carl von Ossietzky* (1935)
*Here is an instance when the right guy got the right award, but the committee itself
acted shamefully. Von Ossietzky, a writer and pacifist, helped expose Germany's secret
rearmament in violation of the Versailles treaty. Two members of the Nobel committee
resigned over the decision and Hitler had him arrested and shipped to a concentration
camp.
Nobody (1948)
The rules of the Nobel Prize are kind of odd. There's a provision for not awarding the
prize when no one meets its criteria, and as you'll see as you read through this post,
they should probably be invoking it way more frequently.
But 1948 was an instance when there was an obvious candidate who was somehow
ignored: That year, Mahatma Gandhi, who led India's non-violent movement for
independence, was assassinated. He'd been nominated 12 times previously, but
shunned. Another Nobel rule says the recipient must be living, and the committee did
not see fit to make an exception in this case.
The committee has since bent over backward for the omission. In 2006, remarks
attributed to the head of the committee basically prove the argument of this
post: "Gandhi could do without the Nobel Peace Prize, whether Nobel committee can do
without Gandhi is the question."
Henry Kissinger and Le Duc Tho** (1973)
The Paris Peace agreement had nominally set terms for an end to the Vietnam War by
initiating a ceasefire. And it's true that American forces began leaving. But earlier that
year, the U.S.' secret bombing campaign against Cambodia, which killed hundreds of
thousands of people and which Kissinger spearheaded, had been revealed.
**Le Duc Tho, Ho Chi Minh's successor as Vietnam Communist Party head, at least had
the sense to decline accepting the prize.
Yasser Arafat, Shimon Peres and Yitzakh Rabin (1994)
Another example of the prize's shortsightedness. The Oslo accords seemed like a good
idea at the time, but they merely proved another temporary stopgap in what remains
the world's longest-running conflict.
Kofi Annan and the United Nations (2001)
If the U.N. seems particularly feckless today, one can make an argument that Annan
expedited its decline in relevancy when he was investigated in 2004 for improperly
steering Iraq arms-for-food program contracts to his son. Although he was technically
cleared, it still "indicated that Annan may have initially misled investigators about
contacts he had with senior executives at his son's company before they won a U.N.
contract," according to the Washington Post.
And it's now difficult not to wince at the citation itself, which recognizes Annan and the
U.N. itself for "work for a better organized and more peaceful world."
Wangari Muta Maathai (2004)
Maathai was a lifelong democracy and environmental activist who helped advance
political rights and sustainable development in Kenya and East Africa. Yet she
maintained odd views about the origins of HIV:
"Like many others I wonder about the theories on the origin, nature and behaviour of
the virus. I understand that there is consensus among scientists and researchers
internationally that the evolutionary origin most likely was in Africa even though there is
no final evidence. I am sure that the scientists will continue their search for concluding
evidence so that the view, which continues to be quite widespread that the tragedy
could have been caused by biological experiments that failed terribly in a laboratory
somewhere, can be put to rest."
Barack Obama (2009)
Obama himself suggested he was undeserving of the award, and it seems like another
example of a year when the committee should have just punted.
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/12-worst-nobel-peace-prize-winners-2013-10#ixzz2rvE1q3fy
BaM8750YIHc
Published on 29 Jan 2014
National Security Agency whistleblower Edward Snowden has been nominated for
the 2014 Nobel Peace Prize, thanks to two Norwegian lawmakers. Baard Vegard
Solhjell and Snorre Valen cited the public debate and policy changes brought about
by the NSA leaks, saying Snowden "has contributed to a more stable and peaceful
world order." In the meantime, US Attorney General Eric Holder was on Capitol Hill
on Wednesday, where he testified in front of the Senate Judiciary. Senators
questioned Holder on Snowden's revelations about the NSA's controversial
surveillance programs. RT's Liz Wahl updates us on the hearing and the latest leaks
about the secretive spy agency.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://static.guim.co.uk/static/393c1ef7a278ac2ebac56968cf763cc565290452/common/images/logos/the-guardian/news.gif
Edward Snowden nominated for Nobel peace prize
Two Norwegian politicians say NSA whistleblower's actions have led to a 'more
stable and peaceful world order'
Associated Press in Stavanger
theguardian.com, Wednesday 29 January 2014 11.23 GMT
http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2014/1/29/1390994411108/Edward-Snowden-008.jpg
Edward Snowden will be one of scores of names being considered by the Nobel
prizecommittee. Photograph: The Guardian/AFP/Getty Images
Two Norwegian politicians say they have jointly nominated the former National Security
Agency contractor Edward Snowden for the 2014 Nobel peace prize.The Socialist Left
party politicians Baard Vegar Solhjell, a former environment minister, and Snorre Valen
said the public debate and policy changes in the wake of Snowden's whistleblowing
had "contributed to a more stable and peaceful world order".
Being nominated means Snowden will be one of scores of names that the Nobel
committee will consider for the prestigious award.The five-member panel will not
confirm who has been nominated but those who submit nominations sometimes make
them public.
Nominators, including members of national parliaments and governments, university
professors and previous laureates, must enter their submissions by 1 February.
The prize committee members can add their own candidates at their first meeting after
that deadline.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/29/edward-snowden-nominated-nobel-peace-prize
=======================================================
http://www.voltairenet.org/local/cache-vignettes/L400xH200/Alfred-Nobel-Quotes-1-b7c04.jpg
http://www.secretsofthefed.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/OBAMA-KILL-LIST-PEACE-PRIZE-NOBEL.jpg
http://cdn.freedomoutpost.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Nobel-peace-drone-Obama.jpg
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There have been strange winners in the past......
https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSxLmXnSF54OOmUG_VKHfhGrlRUw18URTeNtHWYCyFrWyx4aYuu
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://static1.businessinsider.com/assets/images/logos/Business_Insider.jpg
12 People Who Should Not Have Won The Nobel Peace Prize
http://static4.businessinsider.com/image/519f7384eab8ea461b00002f-50-50/rob-wile.jpg
Rob Wile
Most awards are meaningless, but some are more meaningless than others.
The Nobel Peace Prize, the latest winner of which will be announced tomorrow morning,
is probably first among these equals.
According to Alfred Nobel's will, the Peace Prize is to be given to individuals and
institutions that "have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations,
for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of
peace congresses."
As the world has advanced, the Nobel committee has justifiably stretched its
interpretation of this edict.
But we've found 12 instances where the prize's recipient reveals the Committee to be
short-sighted at best, or naive at worst (and one where the committee itself behaved badly*).
Elihu Root (1912)
Root was awarded for a bunch of different mini-achievements. A decade earlier,
however, he'd been investigated by a Senate committee for overseeing the brutal
repression of the Philippines independence movement while Secretary of War, and the
country remained under U.S. jurisdiction for more than 30 years.
Aristide Briand (1926)
Briand was the French Foreign Affairs Minister. He received the prize for spearheading
the Locarno Treaties.
The treaties fixed the location of Germany's western boarders. But they left its eastern
borders "open to arbitration," meaning weaker Eastern European nations would have to
negotiate the terms of their own existence. Poland's Foreign Affairs Minister in the
1930s would later say of the treaty that "Germany was officially asked to attack the
east, in return for peace in the west."
Briand would also go on to co-author the Kellogg-Briand pact, which had a similarly
short-lived impact.
Frank Kellogg (1928)
In 1928, Kellogg, the U.S. Secretary of State, co-authored a treaty in which the leaders
of all major powers agreed to renounce war.
It seemed like a good idea at the time — World War I was still relatively fresh in
everyone's minds.
But it's now regarded as a bit of a joke, given that just a few years later Germany would
begin violently expanding its borders.
Carl von Ossietzky* (1935)
*Here is an instance when the right guy got the right award, but the committee itself
acted shamefully. Von Ossietzky, a writer and pacifist, helped expose Germany's secret
rearmament in violation of the Versailles treaty. Two members of the Nobel committee
resigned over the decision and Hitler had him arrested and shipped to a concentration
camp.
Nobody (1948)
The rules of the Nobel Prize are kind of odd. There's a provision for not awarding the
prize when no one meets its criteria, and as you'll see as you read through this post,
they should probably be invoking it way more frequently.
But 1948 was an instance when there was an obvious candidate who was somehow
ignored: That year, Mahatma Gandhi, who led India's non-violent movement for
independence, was assassinated. He'd been nominated 12 times previously, but
shunned. Another Nobel rule says the recipient must be living, and the committee did
not see fit to make an exception in this case.
The committee has since bent over backward for the omission. In 2006, remarks
attributed to the head of the committee basically prove the argument of this
post: "Gandhi could do without the Nobel Peace Prize, whether Nobel committee can do
without Gandhi is the question."
Henry Kissinger and Le Duc Tho** (1973)
The Paris Peace agreement had nominally set terms for an end to the Vietnam War by
initiating a ceasefire. And it's true that American forces began leaving. But earlier that
year, the U.S.' secret bombing campaign against Cambodia, which killed hundreds of
thousands of people and which Kissinger spearheaded, had been revealed.
**Le Duc Tho, Ho Chi Minh's successor as Vietnam Communist Party head, at least had
the sense to decline accepting the prize.
Yasser Arafat, Shimon Peres and Yitzakh Rabin (1994)
Another example of the prize's shortsightedness. The Oslo accords seemed like a good
idea at the time, but they merely proved another temporary stopgap in what remains
the world's longest-running conflict.
Kofi Annan and the United Nations (2001)
If the U.N. seems particularly feckless today, one can make an argument that Annan
expedited its decline in relevancy when he was investigated in 2004 for improperly
steering Iraq arms-for-food program contracts to his son. Although he was technically
cleared, it still "indicated that Annan may have initially misled investigators about
contacts he had with senior executives at his son's company before they won a U.N.
contract," according to the Washington Post.
And it's now difficult not to wince at the citation itself, which recognizes Annan and the
U.N. itself for "work for a better organized and more peaceful world."
Wangari Muta Maathai (2004)
Maathai was a lifelong democracy and environmental activist who helped advance
political rights and sustainable development in Kenya and East Africa. Yet she
maintained odd views about the origins of HIV:
"Like many others I wonder about the theories on the origin, nature and behaviour of
the virus. I understand that there is consensus among scientists and researchers
internationally that the evolutionary origin most likely was in Africa even though there is
no final evidence. I am sure that the scientists will continue their search for concluding
evidence so that the view, which continues to be quite widespread that the tragedy
could have been caused by biological experiments that failed terribly in a laboratory
somewhere, can be put to rest."
Barack Obama (2009)
Obama himself suggested he was undeserving of the award, and it seems like another
example of a year when the committee should have just punted.
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/12-worst-nobel-peace-prize-winners-2013-10#ixzz2rvE1q3fy