Um, REALLY!?!?! Assange for Nobel Peace Prize!?!?!?!?

[Torvald Von Mansee]

http://www.rnw.nl/english/bulletin/n...ileaks-founder

Obama got it for just NOT being Bush, while this guy clearly has done things which have contributed to violence. We're talking 1984 levels of hypocrisy, here!!

[the_tyrant]

the nobel peace price should be awarded to someone 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."

what did Assange do?

[Dowly]

Anything goes after Obama's win.

[ETR3(SS)]

Originally Posted by Dowly

Anything goes after Obama's win.

This.

[the_tyrant]

Originally Posted by Dowly

Anything goes after Obama's win.

You can win with a "boobs for everybody" campaign!

[Betonov]

There should be a: Nobel screwing the goverments and institutions prize.

Assange should be given the highest award possible on this planet, if the peace prize is that then he should have the peace prize, despite if he contributed to world peace or not

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by Dowly

Anything goes after Obama's win.

Anything goes after Arafat's win...

[Onkel Neal]

Originally Posted by Dowly

Anything goes after Obama's win.

Truth!

[Oberon]

Does this mean we should nominate The Third Man for a Nobel Peace Prize?

[CCIP]

Originally Posted by Oberon

Does this mean we should nominate The Third Man for a Nobel Peace Prize?

Well, he's certainly contributed a lot to Obama's credibility - after reading his posts, you can't help but slightly sympathise with the pres. So he totally deserves the Obama Peace Prize

[Torvald Von Mansee]

Originally Posted by Neal Stevens

Truth!

Well, to be fair, NOT being Bush is pretty HUGE

[UnderseaLcpl]

Assange isn't so bad considering some past nominees. Woodrow Wilson won a Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts in forming the League of Nations, which involved going to war and sacrificing hundreds of thousands of soldiers' lives and lying to the public to gain a seat at the peace conference table. Then he did nothing while the British continued to blockade Germany after the cessation of hostilities, even though thousands were starving to death every week. Then he did more nothing while Europe redrew the borders of the world into a fractalized wreck with the intent of securing the dominance of Britain and France, which set the stage for generations of wars and civil unrest to come.

Personally, I think we should award the prize to Kim Jong Il, for his heroic efforts in uniting the world through their shared hatred of him. What a guy, huh?

[Castout]

Originally Posted by Torvald Von Mansee

Well, to be fair, NOT being Bush is pretty HUGE

Absolutely irrelevant. Still no reason to award a nobel peace prize. Unless Obama had been actively trying not to be Bush which would be saying that he was actually like Bush only that he had been actively trying not to be like Bush

[gimpy117]

Originally Posted by Torvald Von Mansee

Well, to be fair, NOT being Bush is pretty HUGE

agree

[goldorak]

Originally Posted by Dowly

Anything goes after Obama's win.

Yeah right.
After the Nobel peace prize was awarded to Arafat its credibility just went 6 feet under. And it never really recovered afterwards.

Arafat, Obama, Assange whats the difference really ? The first 2 have blood on their hands either directly or indirectly, Assange hasn't killed anyone and has started a moral revolution is how people expect to view their governments doings.
He is more worthy of the prize then either of the other 2 figures. You can hate him, find him a douchebag, obnoxious person, but what wikileaks has done is a great service to all liberal democratic societies.