A Brief Nobel History
October 12th 2007 15:51
NewsMax provided me with this article this morning and I thought it might be a good idea to share it with you. I mentioned in a previous blog what the Nobel Peace Prize has become. Here are the facts and evidence for those who require it. The rest of us already know what a miserable political crock it has become.
Al Gore Eyes the Nobel Peace Prize
Wednesday, October 10, 2007 1:17 PM
By: Lowell Ponte Article Font Size
In 1939 a member of Sweden’s parliament nominated Adolf Hitler for the Nobel Peace Prize.
Other nominees for this award have included Hitler’s fellow socialists Benito Mussolini and Soviet Communist dictator Joseph Stalin, who also murdered millions.
Odds-makers are betting that this Friday, Oct. 12, former American Vice President Al Gore will snatch what running mate President Bill Clinton never could, despite their behind-the-scenes lobbying — this Nobel Prize.
Alfred Nobel, inventor of dynamite and military munitions, created the Peace Prize. Nobel’s will endowed what has become a $1.5 million (tax-free) annual award “to the person who shall 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.”
But Al Gore has done nothing to promote international fraternity, abolish or reduce standing armies, or promote peace conferences.
Logic has been twisted into pretzels to concoct reasons why Gore deserves the Nobel Peace Prize. The resulting sloppy syllogism (or AlGorerithm): global warming could produce famine and millions of refugees, begetting international conflicts. Gore’s anti-global warming crusade would be honored for trying to prevent this destabilization of nations.
“There are already climate wars unfolding,” the head of the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs Jan Egeland told Reuters. “I think the whole issue of climate change and the environment will come at some point and reflect in the [Nobel Peace] prize.”
Nobel Prize pundits told Reuters they expect the prize to be shared by Gore and Canadian Inuit activist Sheila Watt-Cloutier, “who has shed light on how global warming affects Arctic peoples.”
Earlier this month a British judge ruled that Gore’s Oscar-winning climate film "An Inconvenient Truth" promotes “partisan political views” and cannot be used in the nation’s schools without identifying it as, in effect, Orwellian agitprop. If troubled by Gore’s dishonest film, the Nobel committee might instead honor the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
Since it began in 1901, the Nobel Peace Prize has gone to a wide variety of winners, some more noble than others.
In 1906 it was given to jingoistic President Theodore Roosevelt for his role in peace treaty collaborations.
In 1919 this prize went to President Woodrow Wilson for helping create the League of Nations, American membership in which the U.S. Senate refused to ratify.
In 1929 it was awarded to American Frank B. Kellogg for the Kellogg-Briand Pact that renounced war among the great powers and, along with arms-reduction agreements, opened the way for the militarization of Nazi Germany and imperialist Japan. The road to hell, it proved once again, can be paved by blindly-idealistic peaceniks.
In 1952 the Nobel Peace Prize went to Albert Schweitzer, advocate of “Reverence for Life,” who once paternalistically said of the hospital he established in Gabon that “I see the Africans as my brothers, but I never forget that I am their older brother.”
In 1959 the prize committee picked Philip Noel-Baker, a British peace activist who for decades blamed wealthy munitions manufacturers — like Alfred Nobel — for causing wars to make money.
In 1970, the Nobel Prize went to agronomist Norman Borlaug for his excellent research that has increased global grain production. In 2004 it honored Kenyan activist Wangari Maathai for her efforts to get women to plant trees across Africa. You should expect environmentalists would invoke both to justify a Gore win this week.
But recent decades have seen several dubious and joint prizes given to celebrate the illusion, not the reality, of peace.
In 1973 Henry Kissinger and Communist North Vietnam negotiator Le Duc Tho were given the Nobel Prize for the Vietnam peace accord that opened the way soon thereafter for the extermination of non-Communist South Vietnam.
In 1994 Israeli negotiators Shimon Peres and Yitzhak Rabin were chosen to share the Peace Prize with terrorist Palestinian Authority boss Yasser Arafat. But Palestinian terrorism continues, and there has been no lasting peace.
The Peace Prize was becoming a debased, politicized currency. In 1990 it went to Soviet leader Mikhail Sergeyevich Gorbachev but it was not awarded jointly to his partner in peacemaking former President Ronald Reagan.
In 1992 it went to Guatemalan Marxist activist Rigoberta Menchu, despite controversy over falsehoods in her self-serving autobiography.
In 1993 South African leader Frederik Willem de Klerk shared the prize with Communist Nelson Mandela, convicted by a racist Apartheid court of killing cops. The post-Apartheid government Mandela helped create now winks at rape gangs in city streets and has begun to imitate Zimbabwe’s Marxist dictator Robert Mugabe by breaking its past promises and confiscating white-owned property.
In 2002 the Nobel Prize was awarded to former Democratic President Jimmy Carter, ostensibly “for his decades of untiring effort to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts.” In reality, as the socialist head of the Nobel committee said, Carter won as a way Europeans could “kick the shins” of Republican President George W. Bush for U.S. policies in Afghanistan and the Middle East.
Carter helped topple U.S. ally the Shah of Iran, which begat the Iran-Iraq War and Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, which launched al-Qaida and led to 9/11. Arrogant Peace Prize winner Carter has the blood of almost a million people, including nearly 7,000 Americans, on his hands.
At least 181 names were officially submitted for this year’s Nobel Peace Prize, including those of radio talk-hosts Rush Limbaugh and Los Angeles KFI morning star Bill Handel.
If Gore wins the Nobel Prize, this 2000 Democratic Party standard-bearer might yet enter the 2008 Democratic race for its presidential nomination. Corporate billionaires have given Gore enormous wealth. “The national DraftGore.com organization has gathered around 127,000 signatures to put Gore on primary ballots,” NewsMax reported on Oct. 9, “and is planning to run an ad in The New York Times [doubtless at the discounted MoveOn.org rate] urging him to run.”
Liberal political TV series The West Wing starred Martin Sheen as a Nobel-prizewinning (in economics) Democratic president. Could Al Gore make this left-wing fantasy come true?
© 2007 NewsMax. All rights reserved.
Maybe you should consider subscribing to NewsMax, too. It's amazing how much you can learn from their reports!
Al Gore Eyes the Nobel Peace Prize
Wednesday, October 10, 2007 1:17 PM
By: Lowell Ponte Article Font Size
In 1939 a member of Sweden’s parliament nominated Adolf Hitler for the Nobel Peace Prize.
Other nominees for this award have included Hitler’s fellow socialists Benito Mussolini and Soviet Communist dictator Joseph Stalin, who also murdered millions.
Odds-makers are betting that this Friday, Oct. 12, former American Vice President Al Gore will snatch what running mate President Bill Clinton never could, despite their behind-the-scenes lobbying — this Nobel Prize.
Alfred Nobel, inventor of dynamite and military munitions, created the Peace Prize. Nobel’s will endowed what has become a $1.5 million (tax-free) annual award “to the person who shall 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.”
But Al Gore has done nothing to promote international fraternity, abolish or reduce standing armies, or promote peace conferences.
Logic has been twisted into pretzels to concoct reasons why Gore deserves the Nobel Peace Prize. The resulting sloppy syllogism (or AlGorerithm): global warming could produce famine and millions of refugees, begetting international conflicts. Gore’s anti-global warming crusade would be honored for trying to prevent this destabilization of nations.
“There are already climate wars unfolding,” the head of the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs Jan Egeland told Reuters. “I think the whole issue of climate change and the environment will come at some point and reflect in the [Nobel Peace] prize.”
Nobel Prize pundits told Reuters they expect the prize to be shared by Gore and Canadian Inuit activist Sheila Watt-Cloutier, “who has shed light on how global warming affects Arctic peoples.”
Earlier this month a British judge ruled that Gore’s Oscar-winning climate film "An Inconvenient Truth" promotes “partisan political views” and cannot be used in the nation’s schools without identifying it as, in effect, Orwellian agitprop. If troubled by Gore’s dishonest film, the Nobel committee might instead honor the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
Since it began in 1901, the Nobel Peace Prize has gone to a wide variety of winners, some more noble than others.
In 1906 it was given to jingoistic President Theodore Roosevelt for his role in peace treaty collaborations.
In 1919 this prize went to President Woodrow Wilson for helping create the League of Nations, American membership in which the U.S. Senate refused to ratify.
In 1929 it was awarded to American Frank B. Kellogg for the Kellogg-Briand Pact that renounced war among the great powers and, along with arms-reduction agreements, opened the way for the militarization of Nazi Germany and imperialist Japan. The road to hell, it proved once again, can be paved by blindly-idealistic peaceniks.
In 1952 the Nobel Peace Prize went to Albert Schweitzer, advocate of “Reverence for Life,” who once paternalistically said of the hospital he established in Gabon that “I see the Africans as my brothers, but I never forget that I am their older brother.”
In 1959 the prize committee picked Philip Noel-Baker, a British peace activist who for decades blamed wealthy munitions manufacturers — like Alfred Nobel — for causing wars to make money.
In 1970, the Nobel Prize went to agronomist Norman Borlaug for his excellent research that has increased global grain production. In 2004 it honored Kenyan activist Wangari Maathai for her efforts to get women to plant trees across Africa. You should expect environmentalists would invoke both to justify a Gore win this week.
But recent decades have seen several dubious and joint prizes given to celebrate the illusion, not the reality, of peace.
In 1973 Henry Kissinger and Communist North Vietnam negotiator Le Duc Tho were given the Nobel Prize for the Vietnam peace accord that opened the way soon thereafter for the extermination of non-Communist South Vietnam.
In 1994 Israeli negotiators Shimon Peres and Yitzhak Rabin were chosen to share the Peace Prize with terrorist Palestinian Authority boss Yasser Arafat. But Palestinian terrorism continues, and there has been no lasting peace.
The Peace Prize was becoming a debased, politicized currency. In 1990 it went to Soviet leader Mikhail Sergeyevich Gorbachev but it was not awarded jointly to his partner in peacemaking former President Ronald Reagan.
In 1992 it went to Guatemalan Marxist activist Rigoberta Menchu, despite controversy over falsehoods in her self-serving autobiography.
In 1993 South African leader Frederik Willem de Klerk shared the prize with Communist Nelson Mandela, convicted by a racist Apartheid court of killing cops. The post-Apartheid government Mandela helped create now winks at rape gangs in city streets and has begun to imitate Zimbabwe’s Marxist dictator Robert Mugabe by breaking its past promises and confiscating white-owned property.
In 2002 the Nobel Prize was awarded to former Democratic President Jimmy Carter, ostensibly “for his decades of untiring effort to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts.” In reality, as the socialist head of the Nobel committee said, Carter won as a way Europeans could “kick the shins” of Republican President George W. Bush for U.S. policies in Afghanistan and the Middle East.
Carter helped topple U.S. ally the Shah of Iran, which begat the Iran-Iraq War and Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, which launched al-Qaida and led to 9/11. Arrogant Peace Prize winner Carter has the blood of almost a million people, including nearly 7,000 Americans, on his hands.
At least 181 names were officially submitted for this year’s Nobel Peace Prize, including those of radio talk-hosts Rush Limbaugh and Los Angeles KFI morning star Bill Handel.
If Gore wins the Nobel Prize, this 2000 Democratic Party standard-bearer might yet enter the 2008 Democratic race for its presidential nomination. Corporate billionaires have given Gore enormous wealth. “The national DraftGore.com organization has gathered around 127,000 signatures to put Gore on primary ballots,” NewsMax reported on Oct. 9, “and is planning to run an ad in The New York Times [doubtless at the discounted MoveOn.org rate] urging him to run.”
Liberal political TV series The West Wing starred Martin Sheen as a Nobel-prizewinning (in economics) Democratic president. Could Al Gore make this left-wing fantasy come true?
© 2007 NewsMax. All rights reserved.
Maybe you should consider subscribing to NewsMax, too. It's amazing how much you can learn from their reports!
| 56 |
| Vote |
subscribe to this blog
Comment by youranter
youranter
Opinions
opinionatedranter
Tales From The Green Lantern
Comment by Jim Stillman
If I didn’t know better, I would think this post an attempt at satire and humor. You and other right-wing ideologues and global warming deniers would find fault with Al Gore if he said the sky were blue. Your co-believers wouldn’t be happy with the Nobel Committee unless the Peace Prize was awarded to George W. Bush or Dick Cheney for their role in bringing peace and democracy to the Middle East and for their championing of extraordinary rendition.
You and your friends continue to snicker about Mr. Gore, the environment and global (not “glo-bull”, that’s getting less cute each time you use it) probably in the mistaken belief that sneering is an indication of sophistication.
The right stole the 2000 election, aided by a political Supreme Court. As a result we are in the worse mess this country has been in during my lifetime. Hopefully, we can turn the corner in 2008. Mr. Gore and Jimmy Carter have done a lot to help the world, what can we expect from George Bush when he rides off into the sunset? Devotion to a cause that results in a huge monetary reward, all of which is donated to charity? Will Messrs. Bush and Cheney be “points of light”?
The shutting down of conservative brains after seven years of unmitigated disasters is a wonder to behold. It would also be a source of great merriment were it not that so many people still take their blather seriously.
And in response to the anticipated patronizing question, I do feel better.
Comment by S.L. Bradish
People don't snicker at Gore for any other reason than the simple fact that he is an idiot who keeps getting lots of publicity for his stupidity.
Are you telling me that Hitler wasn't nominated in 1938? Good thing he didn't win, huh? You'd probably be defending him, too.
As for what President Bush will do when his term is over, probably go back to his ranch and enjoy retirement without the libs/dems in his face every minute. That's what I'd do.
And, just in case your memory is failing, the 2000 election wasn't stolen. In spite of Gores whining and tantrums, and how many recounts(?) Bush won. Get over it, Jim. Tantrums and sour grapes are very unattractive, even for lib/dems.
I don't know what to tell you, since you are obviously not interested in real news. That left spin must make you dizzy... maybe that explains it...