WikiLeaks, Internet Nominees For Nobel Peace Prize 202
Hugh Pickens writes writes "WikiLeaks and the Internet are among a record 241 nominations for the 2011 Nobel Peace Prize that also includes Afghan rights advocate Sima Samar, the European Union, former German Chancellor Helmut Kohl, Cuban dissident Oswaldo Paya Sardinas, Russian rights group Memorial and its founder Svetlana Gannushkina. 'Looking at the long term, we can say interest in the prize is strong and growing along with the number of candidates,' says Geir Lundestad, a non-voting member of the Nobel panel. WikiLeaks grabbed the world's attention and angered a number of governments by publishing thousands of secret US diplomatic cables, while pundits say the Internet or social media such as Facebook and Twitter, which have been used to help organize dissent in countries with oppressive governments, could be rewarded. Under the leadership of former Prime Minister Thorbjoern Jagland, the Nobel panel has not shied away from bold decisions — first picking Barack Obama just months after he became US president, and last year awarding the prize to jailed Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo."
Hopelessly political (Score:4, Insightful)
The prize now has become so political that it's hard to take it seriously anymore. There is no way Wikileaks stands a chance because of the way the committee is beholden to Western governments. Only pro-Western dissidents ever win, NEVER anti-Western dissidents or even those who might be construed as opposed to Western governments (ala Wikileaks). Obama's prize was the height of this political hypocrisy--giving him the award before he even had the chance to do anything, just on his word that he was going to do peaceful stuff (which he hasn't, if anything he's expanded Bush's heavy-handed war policies even more).
Vote Anonymous! (Score:3, Insightful)
"Thank you, thank you. We did it for the lulz." *Applause*
OMG! They nominated WikiLeaks! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Hopelessly political (Score:5, Insightful)
The hypocrisy in giving Obama the prize wasn't because he didn't have the chance to do anything. It's because Obama ended up embracing and extending Bush's wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, bombing Pakistan and the covert operations there. He utterly failed in his promise to close Guantanamo, insists on continuing the practice of jailing so-called enemy combatants indefinitely with no evidence or trial, etc etc etc.
You don't give someone who willingly insists on conducting global wars the peace prize. At least not if you have any credibility whatsoever.
Re:The nomination of Wikileaks (Score:5, Insightful)
Known terrorists have literally been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. Obama was awarded the prize for having done absolutely nothing to earn it. The combination literally means everyone on earth has earned a Nobel prize. Sadly, the prize has become something of a sad joke and isn't respected by anyone with a brain. Worse, in modern times, they've been attempting to use it to shape politics rather than reward high ethics and peaceful politics, making it all the more pathetic.
The Nobel Peace Prize is absolutely meaningless at this point in time.
Re:Hopelessly political (Score:4, Insightful)
Obama basically got the prize for the new START treaty. Of course his actions since then have been very unconvincing and many would like to be able to retract the prize after so many U-turns.
Re:The nomination of Wikileaks (Score:2, Insightful)
Every time I see these slams against Obama for getting the prize for nothing, I smile. Because the way the rants are phrased only prove to me that committee made the right choice. Obama is just the placeholder. It's the American people who really won the award.
"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."
Re:The nomination of Wikileaks (Score:5, Insightful)
Known terrorists have literally been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.
There are at least 2 counterarguments to this being somehow illegitimate:
1. "Terrorist" is an extremely hard word to define, because almost everything that people generally considered terrorists do, governments also do. For instance, the US government has blown up apartment buildings in Yemen to try to influence Yemeni policy. All too often, "terrorist", like "communist" 50 years ago, just means "some guy a government doesn't like".
2. Known terrorists can in fact make peace. The IRA were terrorists, yet they made peace with the UK. The ANC were at times terrorists, but Nelson Mandela made peace with the South African government.
Not assange. Manning. (Score:3, Insightful)