World

Partly Sunny with Showers 11° London Hi 12°C / Lo 6°C

And the other Nobel Peace Prize nominees were...

When President Obama unexpectedly won, he defeated more than 200 proposed candidates. These six are among the most inspirational on that list

Denis Mukwege: Doctor dedicated to helping rape victims

EPA

Denis Mukwege: Doctor dedicated to helping rape victims

Denis Mukwege: Doctor dedicated to helping rape victims

The epidemic of sexual violence in Democratic Republic of Congo visits most of us in the form of statistics, like the 27,000 rapes reported in a single year in a single province, or the 70 per cent of the women of one town who had been brutally assaulted.

The crisis visits Dr Denis Mukwege in a different way. It's there every day in the waiting room of his surgery in Bukavu, the capital of South Kivu, the province where the first statistic was recorded.

An average of 10 women come every day, sometimes from hundreds of miles away, having been subjected to some of the worst acts of sadism imaginable. "It is important to point out that this sexual terrorism is done in a methodical manner," the 53-year-old told the US Senate last year. "Generally the victims are raped by several men at a time, one after another; in public, in front of parents, husbands, children or neighbours. Rape is followed by mutilations or other corporal torture."

In a country where sexual violence has reached levels never seen before and that no one can fully explain, Dr Mukwege is the man who has devoted his life to trying to repair the damage done to women often left for dead.

He was, for a long time, the only gynaecologist treating rape wounds in Congo. At the Panzi hospital in Bukavu, he performs as many as half a dozen surgeries a day; so far he has treated 21,000 women. His pioneering work has helped thousands of these women reclaim something of their physical selves and begin to heal some of the psychological wounds.

A pastor's son who saw at first hand the suffering of women in rural areas who would have to travel bleeding on the backs of donkeys when pregnancies went wrong, he decided to become a doctor. After studying obstetrics and gynaecology in Angers, France, he returned to Lemera, Kivu, to set up a clinic.

This effort was burned to the ground in 1996 during the first civil war. After settling in Bukavu to try again, he found that the maternity ward at Panzi was overrun by women who had been raped and that the numbers were growing. Dr Mukwege's response was to set up a ward for victims of sexual violence, and his work was recognised with the Olof Palme Prize last year, when he was also named African of the Year and given the UN human rights prize.

The doctor has repeatedly been asked to explain why the horrors are occurring in Congo but he limits himself to explaining what is happening.

"Here it is not rape because you have desire for a woman, it's rape because you want to destroy that person through her private parts," he said recently. "There is no appropriate expression, because if these were men, were shot by a gun, we would call it genocide. But it is another type of genocide."

Daniel Howden

Video: Surprise Nobel for Obama

Sima Samar: Working for Afghan families

Sima Samar has spent her life breaking through seemingly unbreachable barriers. The first Hazara woman to obtain a degree in medicine from Kabul University, she now dedicates her life to the rights of women and children. She is chairwoman of the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission and UN special rapporteur on human rights in Sudan. For many years, she would have considered such roles impossible.

She started her work in 1984 after her husband disappeared at the hands of the Communist regime. By 1987, she had opened a hospital for women, and set up clinics and girls' schools. In all, she opened 10 clinics, four hospitals and schools for 17,000, which put her in a perilous position after the Taliban seized control in the late 1990s.

But whatever obstacles she faces, Ms Samar remains determined. "I've always been in danger, but I don't mind," she once told the BBC.

Andrew Buncombe

Ghazi bin Muhammad: Philospher in search of peace

In the wake of 9/11, Prince Ghazi bin Muhammad became an increasingly important player in religious dialogue. A philosophy professor in Islamic faith at Jordan University, the Jordanian prince's supporters said he deserved the award because he encourages debate on the relationship between Islam and other faiths.

In 2005, he brought prominent Islamic scholars together to work out a "theological counter-attack" against terrorism, and he is regularly praised for his ability to emphasis similarities between East and West. After Pope Benedict XVI's 2006 lecture that was seen by many as an attack on Islam, the Cambridge-educated prince, left, was among prominent Islamic scholars to sign an influential letter entitled A Common Word Between Us the following year. "Without peace and justice between these two religious communities," the letter read, "there can be no meaningful peace in the world".

Miranda Bryant

Greg Mortenson: Mountaineer fighting Islamic extremism with education

It was a failed attempt to climb K2 in Pakistan in 1993 that set Greg Mortenson on a path that would take him almost to the humanitarian summit of the Nobel Peace Prize.

Exhausted from the climb, recovering in a remote village Mr Mortenson, left, met a group of children sitting in the dirt and writing with sticks in the sand. He promised to build them a school. It seemed, he says, a "rash" promise.

The story of what happened next is told in Mr Mortenson's book, Three Cups of Tea: One Man's Mission to Promote Peace ... One School at a Time, a bestseller that is now required reading for military leaders as well as for humanitarians. In the mountains of Pakistan and Afghanistan, many say, his work has been transformative. His Central Asia Institute has built 84 schools in the region, educating mainly girls, and Mr Mortenson, 51, has become a tireless advocate of the need to build human relationships with the Muslim world. His mantra: politics won't bring peace, people will bring peace.

"These are secular schools that will bring a new generation of kids that will have a broader view of the world," he says. "We focus on areas where there is no education. Religious extremism flourishes in areas of isolation and conflict."

Born to two American humanitarian workers, during his own humanitarian career he has been kidnapped, shot at, and forced to deal with two fatwas issued against him by local clerics opposed to female education. In 2009 alone, he has been awarded Pakistan's highest civilian award, the Star of Pakistan, and a half dozen other humanitarian gongs but, for this year at least, he failed to land the biggest one of all.

Stephen Foley

Piedad Córdoba: Colombia's 'woman of peace'

A few days before the Nobel Peace Prize winner was announced, Oslo's International Peace Research Institute said the outspoken Colombian senator, Piedad Córdoba, was the favourite for the honour.

According to Kristian Berg Harpviken, the institute's director, her work "eagerly advocating a peace process in her country" made her a major contender. But not everyone loves Colombia's "woman of peace". She has braved controversy, kidnap and assassination attempts for her politics, and her integral role in negotiating with the guerrilla group Farc has stirred both praise and anger.

Her achievements are, however, indisputable. As head of Colombians For Peace, a group trying to put an end to the 45-year conflict between the government and Farc, Ms Córdoba was the government's official mediator in the humanitarian exchange discussions of 2007, and she secured the release of 16 hostages. One former captive, Alan Jara, the former governor of Colombia's Meta state, called her "an angel who could carry me to freedom".

Ms Córdoba's nomination praised her for seeking a solution to the conflict. It has sometimes been a dangerous calling. In 1999, she was kidnapped by paramilitaries before she was freed and exiled, with her family, to Canada. Only 14 months later, she returned to resume her work.

The 54-year-old former lawyer was born in Medellin, Antioquia, in north-western Colombia, to an Afro-Colombian father and a white mother. Her political opponents maintain that she is too close to Farc, and when email correspondence with Ms Córdoba was found on the computer of a now-dead rebel leader, Raul Reyes, she was accused of complicity with the group. Pictures of her meeting with Reyes drew further incriminations.

But, says Ms Córdoba, the conflict will be solved only if the guerrillas negotiate with people they trust. "We have to finish this conflict with words and with dialogue," she argues. "If I have to return to the Farc and have a photo taken, I'll do it again."

Miranda Bryant

Wei Jingsheng: The father of Chinese democracy

For a Chicago community organiser to rise far enough to receive the Nobel Prize is fairly remarkable; had a former electrician at Beijing Zoo been so honoured, the recognition would have been truly extraordinary.

But Wei Jingsheng, above, has come far from that humble beginning: indeed, his nomination this year is the seventh he has received for his work fighting for democratic rights in China. Now 59, Mr Wei was once a convinced ideologue, who served as a Red Guard during the Cultural Revolution. That view changed as he saw the reality of Chairman Mao Zedong's China, and he became a committed democratic activist, who was jailed for 18 years until international pressure forced his release in 1997.

His prison sentence was for taking part in the "Democracy Wall" movement in 1978, when students and activists displayed uncensored news and dissenting opinions on a brick wall near Tiananmen Square, just as the Red Guards had done themselves in the universities early in the Cultural Revolution. Mr Wei posted an article, The Fifth Modernisation, that became a famous dissident text. "We want to be masters of our own destiny," Mr Wei wrote. "We need no gods or emperors." During imprisonment, he wrote open letters to the regime on toilet paper that were smuggled out and published, making him a figurehead for democratic campaigners. He was released in 1993 but refused to be silenced. That determination led to another jail sentence, this time for 14 years.

But by then, Mr Wei had powerful backers. Bill Clinton intervened, and he was released in November 1997 and allowed to fly to the US on medical grounds, shorthand for exile. His 1997 book, The Courage to Stand Alone: Letters from Prison and Other Writings, is seen as one of the classics of Chinese dissident literature.

Since those days, Mr Wei has won a string of major human rights awards for his work, and become known as "the father of Chinese democracy". But he is by no means the only Chinese dissident thought to have a chance of the Nobel, an option that may in the end have seemed too controversial for the committee.

Hu Jia has been imprisoned since 2007 for exposing government abuses and the plight of China's Aids sufferers, and Rebiya Kadeer, the exiled leader of China's Uighur minority, has led the fight for minority rights.

Clifford Coonan

Post a Comment

View all comments that have been posted about this article.

Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.

Comments

(no subject) - [info]may020 - Monday, 12 October 2009 at 01:15 am (UTC) Expand
Run an Independent Poll
[info]drlizmiller wrote:
Monday, 12 October 2009 at 06:25 am (UTC)
Could the Independent run its own Nobel Peace Prize award and let the people decide who might have been the best candidate to receive it?

I would like to add Morgan Tsvangirai for his work in bringing Peace to Zimbabwe, although it may well be too early to see the full impact of his contribution - perhaps in a couple of years time.
Where does the cash prize come from
[info]kingofmumu wrote:
Monday, 12 October 2009 at 07:49 am (UTC)
It comes from the Nobel family who creates its income from selling "High Explosives." I hope it is all being used for peaceful purposes :-)
Re: Where does the cash prize come from
[info]boeticia wrote:
Monday, 12 October 2009 at 12:19 pm (UTC)
As far as Alfred Nobel himself was concerned, he regretted the loss of lives due to the invention of dynamite, and had a change of heart which led to the creation of his Nobel Prize. Whether his descendants still manufature, the explosives, one doesn't know, but one can find that out.
Try finding out, and tell us.
What a travesty!
[info]arthurshort wrote:
Monday, 12 October 2009 at 08:03 am (UTC)
When compared with the calibre of candidates in this article, the absurdity of the prize decision will harm Obama politically in the United States. It contrasts his role as international celebrity with his record devoid of any accomplishments. He ceretainly won't won't be receiving any awards for job creation, fiscal responsibility, or backing up rhetoric with concrete action.
All the Muslim candidates are pro-western i.e. pro-Yank
[info]find_empire wrote:
Monday, 12 October 2009 at 12:23 pm (UTC)
From Hussein of Mombasa (who got the Nobel as a consolation prize for not getting the olympics) to the Jordanian "philosopher" the Nobel guys only had eyes and ears for pro-Yank Muslims and picked the biggest warmonger among them, whereas many Muslim leaders made big contributions to peace lately.

Hezbollah leader Nasrallah, who together with his ally the Lebanese Christian leader Michel Aoun has bridged the Shia-Christian part of Lebanon's sectarian divides for years, was joined recently by Druze leader Walid Jumblatt who called for a national unity government with Hezbollah. Nasrallah, Aoun, and Jumblatt should all three have gotten the prize for their efforts to end Lebanon's sectarian woes, and would certainly have been helped in their efforts by it.

The Turkish foreign minister Babacan has been working tirelessly to patch things up between Turkey and the Iraqi Kurds, Turkey and Armenia, Hamas and Fatah, Syria and Iraq, Syria and Israel, and last but not least Iran and the West, being at least partly responsible for Ahmedinajad's climbdown on October 1. Turkey has become a regional peace broker since the Islamist AKP took power but the Nobel guys obviously don't want to make Islam look good when we're having such fun bashing it.
Re: All the Muslim candidates are pro-western i.e. pro-Yank
[info]boeticia wrote:
Monday, 12 October 2009 at 06:45 pm (UTC)
The Nobel Peace Prize committee members are made up of five members nominated by the Norwegian Parliament, and for reasons of his own in his will, to whom Alfred Nobel, giave the task and honour to select a candidate who would do the most for fraterniy among nations.
That obviously gave the committee the legitimation to nominate Pres. Obama, whose first move upon being elected president, was to reach out to Europe and other countries,with whom diplomatic relations was quite poor ever since the last U.S. administration.
The other four prizes for physics, chemistry, literature and medicine, are given out by four Swedish institutions, according to the wish of Alfred Nobel.

I quite agree with you that various Muslim leaders have made great efforts recently, to improve relations within their own countries, as in the Lebanon's case, as well as, wiith other countries in their region. Considering their past history of conflicts, it's not a small achievement.
Obama has received and will receive enough recognition.
[info]hopeforjustice wrote:
Monday, 12 October 2009 at 08:14 am (UTC)
I do not understand why Barack Obama received this prize. As a president of the U.S. he has too many conflicts of interest to bring about real world change. His primary responsibility is to the American people who elected him. Thanks Independent for bringing this list of people with original ideas on compelling issues to our attention, since the Nobel committee did not see fit. Pres. Obama would be greatly respected if we were to decline this prize and enable the honour to be received and money given to someone who can really make a difference in this world.
Re: Obama will receive enough recognition if he actually does achieve anything
[info]hopeforjustice wrote:
Monday, 12 October 2009 at 09:16 am (UTC)
For clarification purposes I mean "Pres Obama would be respected if HE were to decline this prize.." (not "we"). As the President, he does not "need" this prize. Whilst his approach is new and fresh the man has and will receive more than enough recognition for whatever he manages to achieve in the end.
It should be Greg Mortensen.
[info]artsariz wrote:
Monday, 12 October 2009 at 08:47 am (UTC)
He has implemented a peace process in a lawless region, secured private aid for humanitarian needs, and his work is selfness in totallity. He has given hope without the hype tha OObama made and has renageded on issues of openess justice and human rights by sticking to George Bush's policies in these matters.
And..
[info]charleslambert wrote:
Monday, 12 October 2009 at 08:59 am (UTC)
...the least inspirational?

That's right! Silvio Berlusconi...
Berlusconi... you must be joking ?
[info]hopeforjustice wrote:
Monday, 12 October 2009 at 09:21 am (UTC)
sorry, but if Berlusconi was on that list of nominees and actually considered, this makes an absolute mockery of the whole Nobel Peace prize affair. In any case, even a good politicians should only very rarely be considered as a candidate for this prize. That is the job, they're paid to do. This should be about human achievement and achieving great things against the odds for reasons of selflessness.
Re: Berlusconi... you must be joking ?
[info]charleslambert wrote:
Monday, 12 October 2009 at 09:42 am (UTC)
Berlusconi was actually proposed for the prize by a committee of misguided loyalists in Italy, on the grounds that he'd helped to broker a peace deal in Georgia.

Whether the proposal was taken seriously by the Nobel Committee is another matter!
Re: Berlusconi... you must be joking ?
[info]goonjohn wrote:
Monday, 12 October 2009 at 09:49 am (UTC)
Well said hopeforjustice! If politicians should very rarely be considered for this prize, then how comes the name of Mr. Obama? Isn't he a politician? Isn't he paid for his job? ... that's not the point, you better know, that's a lame excuse. Well, I am not lobbying for Mr. Berlusconi, what I'm actually meaning is, the selection of this year's Nobel Peace Prize was not fare. Mr. Obama is not the write person to go it. And only that is the reason this type of debate is arising and continuing frequently... and this debate will remain on and on and on....
Re: And..
[info]nyceconomist wrote:
Monday, 12 October 2009 at 10:18 am (UTC)
Silvio... least inspirational...LOL :-)

newyz, I think its brilliant that Obama got this Prize. Up until today, nobody could figure out the new brand stood for. I was, and to a certain extent still am, under the impression that 'Obama' is simply Bush rebranded. Then again, I might be wrong.

But now, at least, lets hope that this Nobel Prize would at least "force" or pressure Obama into making a strong commitment for a real difference in our world.

So far he has been talking all the talk. Lets hope that that changes and he walks the walk.
Re: And..
[info]goonjohn wrote:
Tuesday, 13 October 2009 at 02:55 am (UTC)
Look through the history of Nobel Prize. Is there anyone (except Madam Query) who got it two times in the world? Which only means that Nobel Prize (as well as any other prize) inspires people to do well until the prize is not achieved. But once it is grabbed, the Laureates come to their ultimate satisfaction that "it is done...."
You said, "...this Nobel Prize would at least "force" or pressure Obama into making a strong commitment for a real difference in our world", I strongly differ with this expectation. This selection can never be a right decision; from any angle you focus on the point, the result will be the same, my friend! So don't try to glorify this case anymore.............
Re: And..
[info]boeticia wrote:
Monday, 12 October 2009 at 07:15 pm (UTC)

Did you mean Burlesque-oni ?????
Mr. Obama, Feeling shy?
[info]goonjohn wrote:
Monday, 12 October 2009 at 09:20 am (UTC)
Mr. President, How do you appear amongst these elite panel of the nominees? Some 10 years ago, the Prime Minister of my country was reported as a "lobbyist" for collecting "Honorary Doctorate Degree" from various international universities including some of the USA. That time we, the people of Bangladesh were ashamed for this type of unethical attitude of our National Leader. But now we are feeling a bit relieved and something proud also, that the US Leader has picked up that same attitude from us! Well, the first world still has so many things to learn from the third world, ha ha ha
Re: Mr. Obama, Feeling shy?
[info]boeticia wrote:
Monday, 12 October 2009 at 12:13 pm (UTC)
Apart from the question if Mr. Obama deserved the Nobel Prize, or not - and he like everyone else, was taken by surprise. He didn't see it coming, and when infomed, declared that he thought he didn't deserve the prize. Apart from that, can one downright refuse the Nobel Prize without causing an awkward dilemma for the nominee, and the Nobel Prize Committee? If Obama had refused offhand, said thank you, but no, thanks - how would have people reacted? The U.S. Republicans would have surely criticised him for it, because where they're concerned, Obama, the Democrat election winner, is for them a permanent object of derision and hateful criticism, bad loser as they are. In other words,
Obama was dammed because he did accept the prize, and would have been criticised by everyone, including his own supporters, had he not.
Food for thought?
Re: Mr. Obama, Feeling shy?
[info]goonjohn wrote:
Tuesday, 13 October 2009 at 03:16 am (UTC)
Thank you Mr./Ms. Boeticia (sorry, I cant detect your gender) for your comment. Going through the write-up, one thing became clear to me that, it was written from the perspective of a supporter of US Democrats. But the award was neither given by the democrats and nor to win the US Election. Even it is not concerned to the US authority or people! My dear friend, can you tell me, what notable performance he have ever done (accept winning the US President Election) which is praiseworthy? What a funny logic you shown that, he had just no way left to accept the award because, doing anything different could reward a chance to his oppositions! A person who is accepting the topmost honorable award of the world without having worth of it, is now leading the world to change it! That might be treated as the biggest irony of the history. And yes, the world is changing... changing norms and values, changing ethics, changing the definitions of what is what!

Actually, as an intelligent person he should understand the politics behind the act. Well, in these days he didn't do anything as a benchmark, but it also true that he hasn't yet done any major mistake. Receiving the Noble Peace Prize is going to be marked as his first ugly spot. That's why I meant that he should withdraw his name at the very first time when it is considered as the nominee of the prize. because he has been informed about the other VIP names nominated with him. As far I know the nomination was held on February 2009, when he was just one months old in The White House. You must admit that before acting as the US President he was nobody to the world and had performed just no job that can be treated as a noble attempt to make a good impact on earth! From that point of view I told that he should feel shy to get that award whereas he felt "Humbled"! that is the basic difference between a peace-worker and a politician!

However, if Henry Kissinger the lunatic have had this award, then why not Obama?

Thank God, I am not going to be awarded this kind of foolish honor in the long future so far...
Religious extremism comes from lack of human fulfilment...
[info]rhysjaggar wrote:
Monday, 12 October 2009 at 10:18 am (UTC)
I've met the odd person who had very strong religious views when young. They needed them for good reasons - they had to suffer bad things as children and it helped them to survive.

In a world of peace, though, it was a block to further progress, as it precluded understanding of others whose childhoods were different and, ergo, for whom strong religious views would not have been helpful.

For those talking in black and white terms about religious extremism I would say this: for each unchangeable experience there will be an optimal religious standpoint - for each person it is different. But as things change, the religious standpoint must move with it.

Religious conflict comes if the religious leadership is:
i. Dogmatic and hierarchical.
ii. Not changing when change is necessary.
iii. Prepared to use force to retain power instead of changing to justify continued leadership.

The K2 mountaineer found one solution: educating the young children who are open to tolerance.

It's something to be greatly admired.

But it's only one part of the jigsaw.

None the less valuable for that, of course....
[info]nyceconomist wrote:
Monday, 12 October 2009 at 10:27 am (UTC)
I think its brilliant that Obama was awarded this Prize. Up until today, a lot of people, including myself, didnt really understand what the 'Obama' brand stood for. Even now, and to certain extent, I am undecided whether Obama is simply Bush rebranded or not.

Anyways, the important thing is merely this: let us hope as one world that this Nobel Prize would at the very least "force" or pressure Obama into making a real committment to bringing about world peace and global change. So far he's been talking all the talk. Lets hope he walks the walk.

I too. like many people across the world, am still scratching my head to figure out exactly what he's done that has been inspirational and deserving of an honour such as a Nobel Prize.
Either the Nobel guys are clowns or they are brilliant
[info]find_empire wrote:
Monday, 12 October 2009 at 12:43 pm (UTC)
Did the Nobel guys give Obama the prize just to suck up to the US or was there a more intelligent motive behind it: To make it almost impossible for Obama to start new wars or expand existing ones? The second possibility has gotten a lot of people talking:

Winning peace prize could stymie Obama


Dan Balz, Washington Post

Saturday, October 10, 2009

William Galston, a former Clinton administration domestic adviser now at the Brookings Institution, called the Nobel a great honor but also a potential burden for Obama, in large part because it was given for ideals rather than accomplishments.

"Not only will he be judged in the future against this exacting standard, but also it may complicate some decisions, such as the one he must soon make concerning Afghanistan," he said.

What of the wars?

What happens, Galston asked, if the president accepts the recommendations of Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the commander of forces in Afghanistan, for up to 40,000 more U.S. soldiers? Will Obama lose favor overseas for failing to live up to the ideals embodied in the peace prize?

White House officials insist that Obama will make the decision about Afghanistan without considerations about the Nobel committee's view of his presidency. But the aura of the peace prize will be a constant presence in every action he takes on the world stage.

[info]the_town_crier wrote:
Monday, 12 October 2009 at 10:57 am (UTC)
The minute I read that Henry Kissinger was once awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, after his extensive and highly methodical 'help' in the south east Asia region, I stopped paying attention to all subsequent awards. I mean really, how on earth such a monster could be awarded such a thing is sickening. If I was ever nominated for it, I'd use my acceptance speech to damn the selection process, to disparage the judges and to highlight the real people behind global peace: not celebrities, not politicians, but humanitarian workers, radical journalists, trade unionists, health workers, teachers, etc.
Nobel est noble
[info]boeticia wrote:
Monday, 12 October 2009 at 07:32 pm (UTC)
The Nobel Prize may have humbled Kissinger? A sudden transformations from Saul to Paul?
Gore Vidal in his writings recently, said he'd seen him among the VIP's on a specially- elevated platform inside the Sistine Chapel, so as to see Michaelangel's painting from close range. Kissinger, according to Vidal, seemed to be particularly interested in the depiction of Hell, upon which, Vidal apparently cried out "Oh look, he's apartment-hunting."
Compelling reason why obama should get the Nobel
[info]dentauthurdent wrote:
Monday, 12 October 2009 at 12:03 pm (UTC)
You are all missing the point - Obama has already provided a fantastic service for the cause of World Peace - he prevented Palin from becoming President. Heck, just for that we should even give him a second Nobel!
Re: Compelling reason why obama should get the Nobel
[info]find_empire wrote:
Monday, 12 October 2009 at 12:35 pm (UTC)
I fail to see what McCain or Palin would have done worse than Obummer. At least they wouldn't lie about it. If they were going to bomb Muslims, they would say so, and not pretend they wanted to make peace with them. If they wanted to bomb Iran, they wouldn't order up 30,000 lb bunker busters while pretending to dialogue with Iran, they would order the bombs and sing "bomb, bomb, bomb Iran." If they supported Israel's fascist/theocratic ruling coalition, they wouldn't pretend to be opposed to new settlements while twisting Abbas's arm over the Goldstein report. They would say we're for Israel, fuck the Arabs.

Obama is just a Republican with a gift for lying convincingly.
Re: Compelling reason why obama should get the Nobel
[info]boeticia wrote:
Monday, 12 October 2009 at 07:06 pm (UTC)
No, his problem is an old American malady - that because he's black - well, not really, having a Caucasian mother - he's a constant target for true racists, and the politically- motivated racists...the ones that cheer for the Republican party team. Whatever he does, or will do in the future as long as he's head of state, Obama will never do anything right, in these people's way of thinking.
I actually wish Obama would, like Kruschev did once in the UN, bang his shoe on the White House table and declare: I'm the boss around here, see? ...and what I say, goes! Basta!!!
He's just much too nice and a gentleman to boot, but who knows? We might all still be in for a surprise!
THE PEACE PRIZE: NOT A PRETTY HISTORY
[info]chuckman_john wrote:
Monday, 12 October 2009 at 12:44 pm (UTC)
At least, Obama gave the world something to celebrate and have some hope about.

Does anyone remember that he replaced the most ignorant and vicious man ever to hold the office? The world was morally exhausted after eight years of that cretin.

A man who killed maybe a million people?

The Peace Prize in general has an odd history and is surely the most ambiguous and inconsistent of prizes.

I think Al Gore's prize was more than a little odd.

Well, then there's the just plain shameful horrors of the prize.

Henry Kissinger, certified war criminal?

Menachim Begin, old Irgun terrorist?

Shimon Peres, political father of Israel's nuclear weapons?

Theodore Roosevelt, imperialist extraordinary?

A few awards in recent decades meant something for sure, as that to Doctors without Borders or that to Jimmy Carter.

But, in general, it's not a proud history.
Greg and Sima: Real Winners
[info]kisakhani wrote:
Monday, 12 October 2009 at 01:50 pm (UTC)
Greg Mortenson and Rina Samar jointly deserved the Nobel Peace Prize. They were not protected by FBI or Secret
Service nor had political affiliations. They actually brought the ''Change" in the lives of the people who live on less
than a dollar a day. Now that Kerry-Lugar bill will provide funds for upliftment of education in North West region of
Pakistan. Greg Mortenson should head this project in Pakistan and help prevent wasteage of the funds at the hands of the present government embedded with high corruption and nepotism. Even if he gets the usual cut as the advisor and operting officer of the project, it will be far less then what would be skimmed by the politicians and
their lackeys of this government in Pakistan.
Hmm...
[info]nilcarbarundum wrote:
Monday, 12 October 2009 at 07:18 pm (UTC)
I feel bad for saying this; but almost any of the above would have been better winners than Obama. Yes, I grant that Obama is worthy of recognition, if only as a refreshing difference form that dunnderhead Bush, but giving the Nobel Peace Prize on what seems like the basis of celebrity just cheapens it. Other than that giving Obama the Peace Prize doesn't raise awareness of any issues that aren't already very much in the news.

My choices would have been Dennis Mukwege, Piedad Cordoba or Wei Jingsheng; on the basis of bravery in the face of danger, selfless sacrifice and shear hard graft.
[info]imagechalice wrote:
Monday, 12 October 2009 at 09:00 pm (UTC)
What the hell are you talking about?!!
Piedad Cordoba Nobel Peace Pre Nominee
[info]colombian_65 wrote:
Monday, 12 October 2009 at 09:21 pm (UTC)
I am so glad to read the Independent today and find a brief description of the Colombian senator who was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize. As Colombian born , I am proud of senator Cordoba for being singled out as an oustanding politician . Not only am I proud because of her nationality but also because this lady deserves to have been nomitated for her long standing work for social justice in Colombia and recently for campaining for a political resolution to the ongoing conflict in Colombia. Unfortunately, there are only a handfull of politicians in Colombia who have taken the lead in fighting the current Colombian regime which is disguised in the robes of an authentic democracy. Piedad is one of those brave politicians who has not been afraid to challenge the long catalogue of blatant events of corruption, extrajudicial killings,etc of the regime of president Alvaro Uribe.
A Canadian's perspective
[info]schweigen2009 wrote:
Monday, 12 October 2009 at 09:55 pm (UTC)
From http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/story.html?id=2088558&p=1

Instead of droning on about "hope" and "a new international climate," a group of people charged with awarding an annual peace prize might find it useful to focus on a more mundane and obvious inquiry. To wit: What part of the planet was beset by bloody war in 2008, but is now entirely at peace?

The only nation that fits the bill is Sri Lanka. And the reason for that is a ruthless military campaign waged by President Mahinda Rajapaksa against a militarized Tamil death cult known as the Tamil Tigers. This conflict has taken nearly 100,000 lives since it began three decades ago. But Mr. Rajapaksa ended it definitively at one stroke, killing or capturing virtually the entire Tiger leadership. It is one of the only times in the history of modern warfare that a guerrilla/ terrorist movement has been utterly destroyed in such a fashion. Overnight, war became a stranger to Sri Lanka.

Sounds like a pretty good candidate for a "peace" prize, don't you think?
Re: A Canadian's perspective
[info]john_of_aus wrote:
Friday, 23 October 2009 at 06:19 am (UTC)
I understand your logic and I hope that Sri Lanka becomes and safe and stable country in the future... but what I'm wondering is why boat loads of Sri Lankan's are now trying (unsuccessfully) to smuggle themselves into Australia? If the place is such a bastion of peace... who are these displaced and desperate people?
Re: A Canadian's perspective
[info]schweigen2009 wrote:
Sunday, 25 October 2009 at 08:07 pm (UTC)
Mate, you must ask the Tamils who are doing this. There are hundreds of thousands of Tamils living side by side with all other ethnicities in Colombo and elsewhere!!
The Nobel Peace Prize From the Viewpoint of Post-Science
[info]post_science wrote:
Wednesday, 14 October 2009 at 10:55 pm (UTC)
The Nobel Peace Prize From the Viewpoint of Post-Science
http://post-science.com and http://infinitespreadsheet.com

Competition and cooperation are two opposite methods to enhance progress. In the absence of a rational method of arbitration or for settling disagreements, competition is generally the alternative. War is the ultimate form of competition.

Capitalism encourages free competition. Under capitalism, competition is the main engine of progress. As a notable example, the world culture has advanced from pre-science and religion to science due mainly to military competition, where the winners are superior in scientific achievements. Today, the world culture is dominated by science, except in some Muslin nations, where religion still dominates.

The solution to peace is a rational method of arbitration, as is demonstrated by the Infinite Spreadsheet, patented by Post-Science Institute for rationally arbitrating the real estate prices between the buyer and the seller.

The solution of peace is not just to avoid wars or military confrontation. Wars are the chief means of social progress in the early age of human progress when the superiority of respective beliefs based on knowledge can only be verified in the battle field, or the freely competitive market place. Before the popular acceptance of the solution of arbitration, competition or war is still the logical method for settling differences.

The Nobel Prize, initiated to encourage science, must understand the nature of war before it can solve the problem of peace. The solution of peace is the solution of value arbitration or simply the solution of value, which lies in the domain of post-science, not science. ### Hugh Ching, Founder of Post-Science, 10/15/2009

Article Archive

Day In a Page

Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat

Select date