John Bolton Nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize?

[splat@14]

Hell seems to have frozen over....


http://www.boomantribune.com/story/2006/2/9/01029/67343

Two Americans who played a major role in exposing Iran's secret nuclear weapons plans have been nominated for the 2006 Nobel Peace Prize.
United Nations Ambassador the Mustache John Bolton and longtime Iran investigator Kenneth R. Timmerman were nominated for their repeated warnings and documentation of Iran's secret nuclear buildup and revealing Iran's "repeated lying" and false reports to the International Atomic Energy Agency.

Bolton was formerly U.S. Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Security and was author of the Proliferation Security Initiative, an international effort to interdict shipments of weapons of mass destruction and related materials, which led to the eventual breakup of the secret nuclear network directed by Pakistan nuclear scientist A. Q. Khan. Bolton repeatedly warned of Iran's nuclear plans.

Timmerman, an independent researcher, has written extensively on Iran's nuclear activities for more than 20 years. His report for the Simon Wiesenthal Center in 1992 first detailed Iran's ties to A.Q. Khan. His most recent book, "Countdown to Crisis: The Coming Nuclear Showdown with Iran," was published last year.

Bolton and Timmerman were formally nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize by Sweden's former deputy prime minister and Liberal party leader Per Ahlmark.

Ahlmark is meeting with journalists, opinion leaders and policymakers in Washington this week at the invitation of the Jewish Institute for National Security Afffairs (JINSA).

[elehhhhna]

1. Cheney will win it. The fix is in.

[deke]

15. A conundrum of the Bush Swift Boat teams.

How does the Bush Swift Boat attackers attack the American Bar Association after Republican after Republican praised the astuteness of that all knowing Bar giving the highest rating to Alito and now that Bar has stated Bush overstepped the boundaries in wiretapping searches by not seeking court warrants?

[Skinner]

2. Nobel peace prize nominations are a dime a dozen.

It doesn't mean squat to be nominated.

According to the Nobel Prize website, here's who can nominate:

The Nominators – Peace

Right to submit proposals for the Nobel Peace Prize, based on the principle of competence and universality, shall by statute be enjoyed by:

1. Members of national assemblies and governments of states;
2. Members of international courts;
3. University rectors; professors of social sciences, history, philosophy, law and theology; directors of peace research institutes and foreign policy institutes;
4. Persons who have been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize;
5. Board members of organizations who have been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize;
6. Active and former members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee; (proposals by members of the Committee to be submitted no later than at the first meeting of the Committee after February 1) and
7. Former advisers appointed by the Norwegian Nobel Institute.

The Nobel Peace Prize may also be awarded to institutions and associations.

Prize-Awarder: The Norwegian Nobel Committee, Oslo

http://nobelprize.org/peace/nomination/nominators.html

[Skelington]

7. I'm not sure "squat" is a fair way to describe the worth,

of a Nobel Prize nomination. I don't agree with this nomination either, but I can't agree that nominations mean "squat".

[Skinner]

9. It's very close to "squat"

Look closely at the list of who can nominate:

1. Members of national assemblies and governments of states;
2. Members of international courts;
3. University rectors; professors of social sciences, history, philosophy, law and theology; directors of peace research institutes and foreign policy institutes;
4. Persons who have been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize;
5. Board members of organizations who have been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize;
6. Active and former members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee; (proposals by members of the Committee to be submitted no later than at the first meeting of the Committee after February 1) and
7. Former advisers appointed by the Norwegian Nobel Institute.

If I am reading this correctly, anyone who happens to sit on a national legislature or university faculty can nominate someone. Just think of how many morons are in the US House of Representatives, to give one example.

A nobel prize nomination is not like (for example) an academy award nomination. There is no limit to the number of nominations, and there is virtually no limit to who can nominate or who can be nominated.

Now, winning a nobel prize -- *that* means something. Usually.

[Skelington]

10. OK so by your logic,

a violent multiple murderer, who is somehow able to grow beyond the mindset of murder, violence, and anger to try and reach out to help others thru writting from a death row cell, has a nomination that counts for squat? Poor bastard.

I'm no Nobel expert, but I'm sure your computer can spit out a long list of unworthy nominee's to support you angle. Just because Bolton got a nomination is no cause to belittle the whole process. Does this hold with the same argument that everything, everywhere is the fault of the current American adiminstration, or is it just the nominations during the bush presidency that count for "squat"? Pretty broad paint brush.

[Skinner]

11. Um, where did I say any of that?

"everything, everywhere is the fault of the current American adiminstration, or is it just the nominations during the bush presidency that count for "squat"?"

I'm not belittling the whole process. The winners of the prize usually seem pretty deserving to me, so overall the system works.

But my point is this: A nobel nomination is virtually meaningless. Any moron with the right occupation can nominate anyone. The fact that Bolton or some death row inmate or anyone else received a nomination only means that there is one person out there who thinks they're deserving. It does not mean that the person is, by any objective standard, deserving of the prize.

[Skelington]

12. So I took your comment regarding the House of Representatives

and the morons incorrectly? If I read more into that then there was, then I am mistaken. I think the reason you made the negative comment about the Nobel process is because of Bolton.

I don't believe only the winners are deserving of the honor, there are "un-deserving" in every arena, but "any moron" still shines a spiteful light on the process to me. I see your comments, as bashing the Nobel Prize process, just to call Bolton an idiot. Isn't it more fair just to say Bolton is an idiot, and did not deserve a nomination?

There are a great number of outstanding candidates for Nobel Prizes who don't win, in all categories of human behavior, social reaserch and sciences. You have pretty big brass clanging ones to only recognize the winners "usually", and declare the rest meaningless. Sorry, "virtually meaningless".

[Skinner]

13. Yes, Bolton is an idiot.

And a nobel peace prize nomination is virtually meaningless, no matter who it's for -- whether it's for our friends or our opponents. Did bolton deserve the nomination? Sure he did, because he fulfilled the minimum requirements to be nominated (which are: someone who is in a position to nominate him did so).

The point still stands: Nobel peace prize nomination = virtually meaningless.

[Skelington]

14. Gandhi first nominated in 1937,

nomintaed every year until 1948, the year he was killed. Those are significantly meaningless nominations. I wonder if all his nominations were meaningless to his followers?

The red cross also has several meaningless nominations untill awards several years later.

I believe you think your point is valid, "nominations are virtually meaningless". I don't. Just because Bolton got a nomination does not reagard most nominations meaningless, you are not just throwing out the baby with the bath water, you are trying to club the doctor who delived the baby.

[Ecumenist]

3. Yeah, right

They both have as much of a chance of winning this award as having a hysterectomies. Never fear, the mass idiocy is pretty much confined to our shores.

[kurth]

4. You too can be nominated by your favorite university professor!

It's amazing how ignorant the media is about this business of being "nominated" for the Peace Prize.

[yorkiemommie1]

5. sure, why not?

we live in bizarro world now!! the U S is CrazyLand!

:sarcasm:

[enigma000]

6. Sweden's former deputy prime minister and Liberal party leader Per Ahlmark

What do we know about this guy?

[no_hypocrisy]

8. You heard wrong. It was a recess appointment like his current

position . . .