Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Politics

Edward Snowden Nominated For Nobel Peace Prize 343

Posted by Unknown Lamer
from the us-declares-war-on-norway dept.
SmartAboutThings writes "Edward Snowden has a chance of getting the 2014 Nobel Peace Prize, as two Norwegian members of the Parliament have nominated him — Baard Vegard Solhjell (a former environment minister) and Snorre Valen. So, the fact that members of the Norwegian Parliament have proposed him for the Nobel Peace Prize could improve his chance of winning. After all, if Obama got this prize, why wouldn't Snowden get it?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Edward Snowden Nominated For Nobel Peace Prize

Comments Filter:
  • by FranklinWebber (1307427) * <franklin@eutaxy.net> on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @01:03PM (#46100917) Homepage

    I'd like to nominate Dr. Thomas Neff (http://hardware.slashdot.org/story/14/01/29/0157208/megatons-to-megawatts-program-comes-to-a-close) as more deserving.

  • Great news! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Runaway1956 (1322357) on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @01:06PM (#46100969) Homepage Journal

    This is a HELL of a lot better than when Obama got the prize, just for being elected. An unknown nobody who had run a successful campaign got a peace prize just for moving into the White House? Totally bogus.

    Maybe the committee has decided that they would like to have some credibility.

    I'm all for Snowden getting the prize. To bad it has been cheapened with some of the past awards.

    • Re:Great news! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Impy the Impiuos Imp (442658) on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @01:11PM (#46101045) Journal

      Obama got it because tbey wanted to slap George Bush in the face. He should have declined because that is beneath the presidency to participate in such an exercise.

      Although this case may also be seen as a slap at the president, at least Snowden wpuld arguably deserve it, if you approve of him.

      • 4 people/orgs got a Nobel Peace Prize for "not being Bush": Carter, IAEA, IPCC and Obama.

        If Obama does get the anti-congress to finish normalizing relations with Cuba and Iran before the end of his term, and does pull out of Afghanistan (after completing the Iraq withdrawal), it will partially offset the realpolitik of blowing up random people. Not enough to deserve the prize outright, but at least a few major peace achievements, and better than most presidents.

      • Re:Great news! (Score:5, Insightful)

        by RabidReindeer (2625839) on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @02:05PM (#46101815)

        Obama got it because tbey wanted to slap George Bush in the face. He should have declined because that is beneath the presidency to participate in such an exercise.

        Although this case may also be seen as a slap at the president, at least Snowden wpuld arguably deserve it, if you approve of him.

        The Nobel Peace Prize was originally established by someone who had created what he considered a horrible weapon of war to honor and encourage people who had worked to promote and enable world peace.

        Not for not being George W Bush, not even for uncovering a lot of contra-democratic practices. It is, after all, not a "democracy" prize. And by that standard Yasser Arafat actually is more entitled to it than either Obama or Snowden. Not by much, since while dealing peace with one hand, he still had the other under the table dealing war, as we later discovered, but at least to some degree.

        As to whether Obama should have turned it down specifically because it was awarded to slap GWB in the face, I'm not certain I'd go that far. We already knew that US Presidents cannot be looked to as exemplars of virtue.

        On the other hand, he really should have refused it for the simple reason that he hadn't done anything specifically to promote peace at the time. And that was before the drones.

    • Re:Great news! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @01:20PM (#46101155)

      Maybe the committee has decided that they would like to have some credibility.

      The Nobel Peace Prize has LONG been without credibility; it's always been a tool to push some sort of agenda.

      2012 - The European Union? You mean the group that shouted how we should stop Ghadafi from defeating the rebels in Libya, dragged the US into a response and then backed off leaving the US the sole owner of a military intervention they didn't want? Especially after forming deals with Ghadafi that had lessened his grip and got him to give up nuclear programs and chemical weapons? Yeah, that turned out well.

      2009 - Barack Obama - all based on promises and rhetoric and no action... sure.

      2007 - Al Gore for promoting environmental awareness? That's kind of the wrong category.

      1994 - Yasser Arafat? He's done a lot to promote peace in the world.

      1973 - Henry Kissinger and Le Duc Tho for the Paris Peace Accords - I'm sure the South Vietnamese really appreciated Le Duc Tho's peaceful process when he invaded and annexed their country.

      And where is Mahatma Ghandi? Where is Pope John Paul II? The Nobel Peace Price ceased being about "Peace" long ago and has simply been a tool to highlight the political agenda of a few Norwegian scientists.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Immerman (2627577)

        >2007 - Al Gore for promoting environmental awareness? That's kind of the wrong category.

        That depends on your perspective: within the next century or two climate change will likely be the single largest driver of warfare the world has ever seen. With flooding, drought, and famine striking simultaneously around the world things are going to get really ugly.

        Still, I don't know that his sensationalist exploits in "raising awareness" should compare to people that actually get things done.

        • >2007 - Al Gore for promoting environmental awareness? That's kind of the wrong category.

          That depends on your perspective: within the next century or two climate change will likely be the single largest driver of warfare the world has ever seen. With flooding, drought, and famine striking simultaneously around the world things are going to get really ugly.

          Still, I don't know that his sensationalist exploits in "raising awareness" should compare to people that actually get things done.

          Then give it to Gore in 100 years or so. If we need to give it to Gore now, then let's also give it to the people who warned us about killer bees, overpopulation. and invaders from Mars.

      • Re:Great news! (Score:4, Insightful)

        by bob_super (3391281) on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @02:11PM (#46101913)

        If you don't understand the Olso peace accords, and how Arafat shaking hands with a jew and setting up an official Palestinian office was a major peace achievement, you need better teachers.

        • But just like Kissinger, Arafat won the Peace Prize for helping to end violence that he was largely responsible for.

    • Re:Great news! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Antipater (2053064) on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @01:39PM (#46101433)

      I'm all for Snowden getting the prize. To bad it has been cheapened with some of the past awards.

      I'm not. I think giving it to Snowden would serve only as a repudiation of Obama's prize, and not as an actual reward for promoting peace. It would only cheapen the award further.

      It's the Nobel Peace Prize, not the Nobel Privacy Prize or the Nobel Stand-Up-To-Authority Prize. What Snowden did was good and needed and courageous, but it wasn't related to Peace or to saving lives. In fact, it's actually inflamed diplomatic tensions. How about giving it to that doctor in Africa who didn't get it in 2013, or the megatons-to-megawatts guy suggested above?

      • Re:Great news! (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Runaway1956 (1322357) on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @01:43PM (#46101493) Homepage Journal

        And, you don't think that exposing an all-seeing police state has any bearing on peace?

    • Re:Great news! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by kheldan (1460303) on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @02:00PM (#46101737) Journal
      Mod idea up. Snowden may have opened a gigantic, planet-sized can of worms, but it was a festering, nasty-ass can of worms that needed opening. The one spark of non-cynicism that remains alive within me cheers on people like Snowden, and gives me hope that the human race can be saved from a descent into global fascism.
    • by bloodhawk (813939)
      After giving it to people like Obama the nobel peace prize has lost all credibility now anyway so what does it matter who they give it to at this point.
  • Well, sort of [wikipedia.org], anyway.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    Obama won one of these, so what does winning this prize really mean?

    • by MobyDisk (75490) on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @01:13PM (#46101057) Homepage

      As snarky as that comment is, it rings true. The impact of the Nobel Peace Prize has been diluted by awarding it to someone as an attempt to motivate them, rather than based on what they actually did. Perhaps if Obama goes on to earn that prize after the fact then it might restore the prize's meaning to some degree.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @01:25PM (#46101219)

      I mean let's just have a look at the winners:
      A christian woman (mother Teresa) who tortured sick people by not giving them access to treatment and pain killers. (I bet if I left her out I would get +5, but fuck it)
      A bunch of US presidents.
      Henry Kissinger, who was involved in several wars.
      Probably the most similar to Snowden was the German man who alerted the rest of the world to the German re-armament.
      While he did get the prize it caused 2 committee members to resign because they didn't want to give the prize to a "criminal". His crime being of course treason for alerting the rest of the world to the re-armament.
      And lastly Ghandi, who made peaceful protests by not eating. Oh wait, never mind. The person who most comes to mind when you think peace never actually got a nobel peace prize.

  • by rodrigoandrade (713371) on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @01:09PM (#46101017)
    Gives a whole new meaning to the classic phrase "it's not what you know; it's who you know."
    • by dkleinsc (563838) on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @01:28PM (#46101261) Homepage

      Some of those prizes were to people or organizations who really deserved it: Jane Addams (no relation to Gomez or Morticia, you silly people), The International Red Cross (a couple of times), American Friends Service Committee (for humanitarian relief efforts during and after WWII), Linus Pauling, Martin Luther King, Amnesty International, Bishop Desmond Tutu, Nelson Mandela / F.W. de Klerk, Doctors Without Borders, and Ellen Johnson Sirleaf all did a great deal in the service of peace and humanity, and many took great risks to do so.

      That kind of litany makes awards to people like Henry Kissinger even more of a travesty.

  • They need (Score:5, Insightful)

    by waspleg (316038) on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @01:10PM (#46101035) Journal

    to take away Obama's and give him that one. They should do it while playing the candidate Obama vs President Obama videos in the background.

  • Incredible irony (Score:5, Insightful)

    by DoofusOfDeath (636671) on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @01:14PM (#46101077)

    If he wins, then we'll have one Peace Prize winner being honored for resisting the authoritarianism of another Peace Price winner.

  • Obama (Score:5, Insightful)

    by thetagger (1057066) on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @01:14PM (#46101079)

    Just about every human being that does not drone-strike weddings was a better choice than Obama.

    Congratulations to the Nobel Prize comittee for making such a particularly bad choice out of a universe of about 7 billion.

  • by necro81 (917438) on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @01:15PM (#46101091) Journal

    Edward Snowden has a chance of getting the 2014 Nobel Peace Prize

    Yes, but you could argue that G.W. Bush had a chance at the Peace Prize, too, since he was nominated. So could a flying pig, if it was nominated. Anyone who is nominated has a chance at winning.

  • by Sockatume (732728) on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @01:18PM (#46101125)

    I thought that you were supposed to keep any nominations for a Nobel Prize secret? I know that the Nobel committee keeps them sealed for something like 60 years but I have no idea whether it's a convention, a rule, or just simply not bothering to tell anyone on the nominator's end.

    • by firex726 (1188453) <firex726.yahoo@com> on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @01:51PM (#46101599)

      Officially it seems you're right, so either it's a rumor or someone did let it slip.

      http://www.nobelprize.org/nomi... [nobelprize.org]

      > What about the rumours circling around the world about certain people being nominated for the Nobel Prize this year?
      > Well, either it's just a rumour, or someone among the invited nominators has leaked information. Since the nominations are kept secret for 50 years, you'll have to wait until then to find out.

      • by Kjella (173770)

        The Committee does not itself announce the names of nominees, neither to the media nor to the candidates themselves. In so far as certain names crop up in the advance speculations as to who will be awarded any given year's Prize, this is either sheer guesswork or information put out by the person or persons behind the nomination. Information in the Nobel Committee's nomination database is not made public until after fifty years.

        In this particular case, the two politicians in question decided to send out a press release, the Nobel committee will neither confirm nor deny but there's very little doubt that this is genuine.

  • This is just a setup to get Snowden out in the open, so the US can catch him and bring him back to Black Mesa.
  • by Okian Warrior (537106) on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @01:26PM (#46101243) Homepage Journal

    I hope he wins. Having an independent source of income will remove a lot of stress from his life.

    Prof. Farnsworth: "... that may well win me the Nobel Prize!"
    Leela: "In what field?"
    Prof. Farnsworth"I don't care! They all pay the same!"

    "First secure an independent income, then practice virtue."

          -- Old Greek Proverb

  • by sudden.zero (981475) <sudden.zero@gmaiDEBIANl.com minus distro> on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @01:28PM (#46101275)
    ...just because someone is nominated doesn't mean they are worthy, or that they are going to receive it. Let's not forget that in 1939 Adolf Hitler was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize!
  • He was already nominated in 2013 [washingtonpost.com], along with Manning, and at a time where it was very present in its implications in all the world. But the winner, if well to be respected for that, was too close to the current at that time american propaganda to sustain an invasion on Syria. What make you think this time will be different?
  • by Khashishi (775369) on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @01:42PM (#46101471) Journal

    Well, it's hard to say if it ever had any credibility.

  • After all, if Obama got this prize, why wouldn't Snowden get it?

    <sarcasm>Because Snowden hasn't droned enough civilians. [huffingtonpost.com]</sarcasm>

  • As interesting as Snowden is, this is a distraction from the more important (and probably more urgent) question of... when are the criminals [washingtonpost.com] at the NSA going to be brought to justice?

    Also, when do we fire the people that sold out our actual spy talent - with their far more targeted, far more 4th Amendment compatible tools like THINTHREAD - instead of continuing to give a paycheck to the assholes that let 9/11 happen so they could keep funneling money to their contractor friends [consortiumnews.com] to develop the far more expensive TRAILBLAZER? The families of the victims that died do this willful neglegence will probably want to file civil lawsuits, too.

    A cornerstone of the very idea of "justice" is equal protection before the law, and these people need to get their day in court. If they do, then maybe we can start to put this feckless imbroglio [tinyurl.com] behind us and move on, with only the usual political drama to worry about.

    On the other hand, if we fail to accomplish this task - if we fail to obtain some basic symbol that the Constitution is still respected as the highest law of the land - then we've really given up any last pretense that this is any kind of civilized nation with a social contract.

  • by Karmashock (2415832) on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @02:14PM (#46101943)

    in a long long time.

Parts that positively cannot be assembled in improper order will be.

Working...