Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

WikiLeaks Nominated For 2011 Nobel Peace Prize

samzenpus posted more than 3 years ago | from the tattle-to-the-top dept.

News 495

mvar writes "Whistle-blower site WikiLeaks has been nominated for the 2011 Nobel Peace Prize by a Norwegian politician who cited its role in freedom of speech, news agency NTB reported Wednesday. 'WikiLeaks is one of this century's most important contributors to freedom of speech and transparency,' parliamentarian Snorre Valen said in his nomination. Valen cited WikiLeaks' role in disclosing the assets of Tunisia's former president Zine El Abidine Ben Ali and his nearest family, contributing to the protests that forced them into exile."

cancel ×

495 comments

Century (3, Insightful)

Squeeonline (1323439) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082512)

I hate when people say things like "X of the century". It's only about 10% of the way there yet, don't go spoiling the rest for us if you have future sight.

Re:Century (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35082688)

The Nobel Peace Prize means absolutely nothing now. It was blatantly given to someone who had not earned it and did not deserve it, and that person is Barack Obama. He wasn't even in office long enough to help or hinder peace for anyone when it was given to him. It's clear that this once-lofty prize has become infected and tainted by the very politics and cronyism that has corrupted most other institutions. So yeah, this is a nice gesture, but it's just a token one with no real meaning.

Oh and for you more childish types who instantly polarize when Obama is mentioned, grow up. I don't care how nice and decent of a fellow he is. I don't care how much you like him. None of that has anything to do with it. He simply hadn't done anything one way or another for the cause of peace when the prize was awarded to him. There are many people who were more deserving of it than him -- heroes, scientists, doctors, philanthropists, lots of folks who have done much more good. They were all passed up. That's the point.

Re:Century (0, Troll)

mosb1000 (710161) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082776)

What you have said is true. On the other hand, this latest nomination brings the award renewed credibility.

Re:Century (1)

Duradin (1261418) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082924)

Who's getting nominated now?

Re:Century (4, Insightful)

golden age villain (1607173) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082946)

What credibility? What has Wikileaks done for peace? The mention of Tunisia is ridiculous. None of what was mentioned in the cables was news to Tunisians. It was not even news for me who never really researched about the situation in Tunisia. Ben Ali's regime collapsed because he oppressed its population for 20 years and at some point people got sick of it. They did not need anyone to tell them how much the Ben Ali clan was abusing its situation and robbing the country. Plus it remains to be seen how much good this whole revolution will bring.

Re:Century (3, Insightful)

nagnamer (1046654) | more than 3 years ago | (#35083068)

It's done far more than Barak Obama, and I believe that should qualify.

Re:Century (5, Informative)

akma (22089) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082952)

What you have said is true. On the other hand, this latest nomination brings the award renewed credibility.

They gave it to the head of a terrorist organization: Yassir Arafat...... they have no credibility, and will never gain any until they revoke his.

Re:Century (1)

vadim_t (324782) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082814)

I agree that Obama shouldn't have been nominated for the reasons you said.

But it seems like a difficult prize to award. People who do this sort of thing are rare.

There are many people who were more deserving of it than him -- heroes, scientists, doctors, philanthropists, lots of folks who have done much more good. They were all passed up. That's the point.

Got a list?

Re:Century (4, Informative)

GigG (887839) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082986)

If there isn't someone worthy of it don't give it. It wasn't awarded in 1914-16, '23, '24, '28, '32, '39-'43, '48, '55, '56, '66 , '67 and 72.

And as the recepient of the prize is supposed to go "to the person 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."

Wiki leaks certainly didn't do anything to promote fraternity between nations or reduce standing armies or even promote peace.

Re:Century (-1)

unity100 (970058) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082872)

it was given to barack obama, because instead of emphasizing divisions and accumulated (rightful) anger, he chose to express a road of peace, union and collaboration in between races, and managed to successfully bring black and white together during his election campaign.

it doesnt matter whether you like him or not, it doesnt matter what our political views are. this was what had happened.

and, scientists dont get PEACE prices, fool.

Re:Century (5, Informative)

CrimsonAvenger (580665) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082932)

and, scientists dont get PEACE prices, fool.

Norman Borlaug, 1970.

Re:Century (1)

Ellis D. Tripp (755736) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082994)

Linus Pauling, 1962
Joseph Rotblat, 1995

Re:Century (3, Insightful)

chispito (1870390) | more than 3 years ago | (#35083072)

it was given to barack obama, because instead of emphasizing divisions and accumulated (rightful) anger, he chose to express a road of peace, union and collaboration in between races, and managed to successfully bring black and white together during his election campaign. it doesnt matter whether you like him or not, it doesnt matter what our political views are. this was what had happened. and, scientists dont get PEACE prices, fool.

So you're saying that he was eligible for the prize because he was a black man who got white people to vote for him? That's not peace, that's political success. Whether it has a long lasting affect on race relations in the US will remain be to be seen (I'm hopeful).

Re:Century (4, Insightful)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082916)

I've explained this before: the Nobel Peace Prize was given to Obama specifically for not being George W. Bush! Unfortunately, Obama has not done quite as well at not being Bush than many of us had hoped...

You have it backwards. (2)

pizzach (1011925) | more than 3 years ago | (#35083108)

When you recieve something, you feel an obligation to try to uphold it. Obama said himself that he didn't feel like he deserved it, but that he would do his best to live up to it. In many ways, the prize in this instance was meant to serve as a preemptive, "please don't become George W. Bush." That isn't exactly the same as "getting the prize just because he isn't George W. Bush."

Maybe slashdotters are different from normal people, but what would you do if you recieved the Nobel Peace prize? Would it affect how you carry out your daily activities. Would it make you more concious of your choices?

Re:Century (1)

nagnamer (1046654) | more than 3 years ago | (#35083124)

So he got the nobel peace prize for something he was supposed to do? That's retarded.

Re:Century (1)

nelsonal (549144) | more than 3 years ago | (#35083130)

Of course, that's why they gave it to Al Gore, as well. Perhaps the award needs a name change.

Re:Century (4, Informative)

AntiBasic (83586) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082934)

To add the superfluousness of the nobel, the irony of the 2009 recipient hosting a dinner for the man who is imprisoning the 2010 winner was lost on the populace.

They told me if I voted for McCain these things would happen.

It was meant as an award for America (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35083080)

The prize given to Obama was meant to award America for choosing someone they believed would lead us away from war, not so much to award Obama himself.

Given how some in his administration consider Wikileaks a terrorist entity or something close to that, it would be interesting to see how he deals with it politically if they were to get the award.

Re:Century (1)

rs1n (1867908) | more than 3 years ago | (#35083096)

You can see how the prize has become nothing more than a tool for political leverage -- albeit very poorly. This is true even when you consider the more recent recipient Liu Xiaobo. While he may be deserving of the prize, it is hard to ignore the political aspect -- i.e. getting China to make changes with respect to human rights. It almost feels as though this was actually the real intent of the prize, and that Liu Xiaobo was a nominee who happened to be an appropriate face for the prize.

In the years before, the prize was generally given to those who had greatly contributed toward peace (and that their contributions had already happened). That isn't to say that politics was completely out of the picture. However, it was mainly to recognize those who fought for a noble cause, and everything else (politics) came second. Now, it has been completely reversed. The prize is now just a political leverage that happens to also (sometimes) recognize the efforts of individuals/organizations toward peace. What a pity.

Re:Century (1)

Microlith (54737) | more than 3 years ago | (#35083100)

The Nobel Peace Prize means absolutely nothing now. It was blatantly given to someone who had not earned it and did not deserve it, and that person is Barack Obama. He wasn't even in office long enough to help or hinder peace for anyone when it was given to him.

Some might say the prize was devalued when it was given to warmongers. Some might say the award was given as an encouragement, to try and influence his path.

It's clear that this once-lofty prize has become infected and tainted by the very politics and cronyism that has corrupted most other institutions. So yeah, this is a nice gesture, but it's just a token one with no real meaning.

Whose "cronys" might these be? Does Obama or as I imagine is rolling through your head, "the left," have cronies in the committee?

Oh and for you more childish types who instantly polarize when Obama is mentioned, grow up.

So says the person who chose Obama as THE defining moment that the Peace Prize was worthless.

Re:Century (2)

treeves (963993) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082800)

This is one of the most compelling comments on Slashdot about the century made thus far this decade! (this decade started last month btw)

Re:Century (1)

amRadioHed (463061) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082918)

I don't know about you, but the decade started for me a year and one month ago.

No, I'm just kidding. Of course that doesn't make any sense. It actually started in mid-June, 2009.

Re:Century (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35082978)

It actually started in mid-June, 2009.

No it didn't.

Re:Century (1)

shoehornjob (1632387) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082998)

But it's not X of the century. It's the 2011 Nobel Peace Prize. There is a difference.

Re:Century (1)

LinkX39 (1100879) | more than 3 years ago | (#35083094)

I totally agree, it's way overuse. Wish I could expand on my thoughts but I'm smack in the middle of the Snow Storm of the Century right now and the power could go out at any minute.

I second - but... (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35082524)

...anonymously, as I am in the USA

Re:I second - but... (3, Informative)

beefnog (718146) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082596)

I second, and I am openly in the USA :)

Re:I second - but... (4, Funny)

mosb1000 (710161) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082796)

. . . and he was never heard from again.

Re:I second - but... (1)

Kneo24 (688412) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082938)

Oh no, we'll hear from him again, but there will be a drastic shift in his views and beliefs.

Re:I second - but... (1, Funny)

kenholm3 (1400969) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082598)

It won't be anonymous when Assange gets the /. leaks...

DDoS BREAK SMASH BURN RIOT FUN! (2)

Thud457 (234763) | more than 3 years ago | (#35083082)

Speaking of which, what do you think of Anonymous' chances of getting Time's "person of the year" ?

Re:I second - but... (1)

eepok (545733) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082600)

I'm with you! Anonymously!

Re:I second - but... (1)

Fibe-Piper (1879824) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082836)

Or, are you with him (or her), anonymously?

Just great (4, Funny)

Lev13than (581686) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082526)

If Wikileaks has been nominated, does that mean the actual prize going to be won by Mark Zuckerberg?

Re:Just great (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35082564)

You don't read names very often, do you...

Re:Just great (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35082782)

Woosh!

Re:Just great (2)

Khopesh (112447) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082892)

I agree; I thought Nobel Prizes could only be awarded to individuals, which appears to indicate Assange even if he is just a figurehead. As he said on Saturday Night Live,

What are the differences between Mark Zuckerberg and me? I give private information on corporations to you for free, and I’m a villain. Zuckerberg gives your private information to corporations for money and he’s Man of the Year.

Re:Just great (1)

Kneo24 (688412) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082966)

I thought the same too, but after looking through the list on wikipedia there are winners who are an institution and then a person won in the same year. I imagine the person is most likely a figure head of that institution, or someone really important who helped said institution.

Re:Just great (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35083110)

no, Ballmer wouldn't allow it

What an ugly move to discredit wikileaks (3, Interesting)

xophos (517934) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082542)

Just look who got that one before.

Re:What an ugly move to discredit wikileaks (4, Informative)

H0p313ss (811249) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082748)

Just look who got that one before.

2010 - LIU XIAOBO for his long and non-violent struggle for fundamental human rights in China.

2009 - BARACK OBAMA for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples.

2008 - MARTTI AHTISAARI for his important efforts, on several continents and over more than three decades, to resolve international conflicts.

2007 - INTERGOVERNMENTAL PANEL ON CLIMATE CHANGE (IPCC) and ALBERT ARNOLD ( AL) GORE JR. for their efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change, and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change.

2006 - MUHAMMAD YUNUS and GRAMEEN BANK for their efforts to create economic and social development from below.

2005 - INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY and MOHAMED ELBARADEI for their efforts to prevent nuclear energy from being used for military purposes and to ensure that nuclear energy for peaceful purposes is used in the safest possible way.

2004 - WANGARI MAATHAI for her contribution to sustainable development, democracy and peace

2003 - SHIRIN EBADI for her efforts for democracy and human rights

2002 - JIMMY CARTER JR., former President of the United States of America, for his decades of untiring effort to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts, to advance democracy and human rights, and to promote economic and social development

2001- UNITED NATIONS & KOFI ANNAN, United Nations Secretary General

2000 - KIM DAE JUNG for his work for democracy and human rights in South Korea and in East Asia in general, and for peace and reconciliation with North Korea in particular.

1999 - DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS (MÉDECINS SANS FRONTIÈRES), Brussels, Belgium.

1998 - JOHN HUME and DAVID TRIMBLE for their efforts to find a peaceful solution to the conflict in Northern Ireland.

1997 - INTERNATIONAL CAMPAIGN TO BAN LANDMINES (ICBL) and JODY WILLIAMS for their work for the banning and clearing of anti-personnel mines.

1996 - The prize was awarded jointly to: CARLOS FELIPE XIMENES BELO and JOSE RAMOS-HORTA for their work towards a just and peaceful solution to the conflict in East Timor.

1995 - The prize was awarded jointly to: JOSEPH ROTBLAT and to the PUGWASH CONFERENCES ON SCIENCE AND WORLD AFFAIRS for their efforts to diminish the part played by nuclear arms in international politics and in the longer run to eliminate such arms.

1994 - The prize was awarded joinly to: YASSER ARAFAT , Chairman of the Executive Committee of the PLO, President of the Palestinian National Authority. SHIMON PERES , Foreign Minister of Israel. YITZHAK RABIN , Prime Minister of Israel. for their efforts to create peace in the Middle East.

1993 - The prize was awarded jointly to: NELSON MANDELA Leader of the ANC. FREDRIK WILLEM DE KLERK President of the Republic of South Africa.

1992 - RIGOBERTA MENCHU TUM, Guatemala. Campaigner for human rights, especially for indigenous peoples.

1991 - AUNG SAN SUU KYI, Burma. Oppositional leader, human rights advocate.

1990 - MIKHAIL SERGEYEVICH GORBACHEV , President of the USSR, helped to bring the Cold War to an end.

1989 - THE 14TH DALAI LAMA (TENZIN GYATSO) , Tibet. Religious and political leader of the Tibetan people.

Clearly a wretched hive of scum and villainy... if you're a conservative.

Re:What an ugly move to discredit wikileaks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35082886)

Clearly a wretched hive of scum and villainy... if you're a conservative.

I think you made a point you didn't even know you were making. These awards are clearly in large part politically motivated.

Re:What an ugly move to discredit wikileaks (1)

xophos (517934) | more than 3 years ago | (#35083024)

I stand corrected.
I just had Obama freshly in memory.
Most of the others probably deserved it.

Re:What an ugly move to discredit wikileaks (1)

qmaqdk (522323) | more than 3 years ago | (#35083034)

Wonder why they never put Gandhi on that list.

Re:What an ugly move to discredit wikileaks (1)

CyberK (1191465) | more than 3 years ago | (#35083118)

Because he was killed by a very bad man before the world recognized how awesome he was, and the prize can't be awarded posthumously.

Wow (3, Insightful)

rsborg (111459) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082552)

I'm sure this will be suppressed somehow, but this is quite appropriate in my opinion.

Re:Wow (1)

Ancantus (1926920) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082656)

I'm sure this will be suppressed somehow, but this is quite appropriate in my opinion.

It would really be a shame if this news was suppressed, if only there was some whistle-blowing site that would leak this information to the general public.

Re:Wow (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35082956)

Won't happen. Can't be used to criticize the Allies' war on terror since their leader won the same prize two years ago.

Re:Wow (3, Insightful)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082716)

>>>I'm sure this will be suppressed somehow

You mean like how China refused to let the Nobel prize winner go to his own ceremony? Maybe between now and then, the US will arrest Assange and do the same thing. That would truly be ironic.

(US acting like China).

Good! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35082562)

Good! Wikileaks has done more than most of the former nobel peace prize winners to promote transparancy and peace in the world.

Re:Good! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35082694)

Transparency does not necessarily equate to peace.

Publishing other people's gossip hardly rises to a Mother Theresa moment.

Obama vs Wikileaks (1, Redundant)

aaaaaaargh! (1150173) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082572)

They would deserve it more than Obama, which doesn't necessarily imply that they'd deserve it.

Wait a minute... (2)

damn_registrars (1103043) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082592)

At first I thought it said

Van Halen cited WikiLeaks' role in disclosing the assets of Tunisia's former president Zine El Abidine Ben Ali and his nearest family, contributing to the protests that forced them into exile

But I'm pretty sure they don't have the credentials to nominate someone for a Nobel Prize...

A nonstory (5, Informative)

Sonny Yatsen (603655) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082594)

In 2010, 237 nominations were made for the Peace Prize, 38 of which were organizations. While it's of some apparent interest that Wikileaks got a nomination, it is one of many and nomination is open to a lot of people.

Re:A nonstory (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35082648)

Thanks Sonny Yatsen for sharing with us the definition of non story. To cancel out your miserable opinion, I would like to commend the editors for publishing this story!

Worthless (1, Informative)

MarkRose (820682) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082604)

Why would anyone care about the Nobel Peace Prize? It's worthless.They gave it to Obama, before he even did anything, who has gone on to escalate wars, both military and economic.

Frankly, I would turn down such a prize. It no longer stands for anything.

Re:Worthless (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35082662)

Not to mention giving it to at least one known terrorist, Arafat.

Re:Worthless (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35082736)

Yes since he had *so* much to do with starting those wars... oh wait, he didn't.

Re:Worthless (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35082784)

you should google "define escalate"

Re:Worthless (0)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082852)

Obama didn't start the wars.
But he didn't end them either (as promised during his first year).
We're now on year three. Had I been elected president I'd have said, "That's enough" on day two and bring all the boys home. Next I'd empty all the foreign bases and hand them over to the EU, Japan, S. Korea, and so on. The excess money saved would be used to eliminate half the annual deficit.

Re:Worthless (2)

damn_registrars (1103043) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082844)

They gave it to Obama, before he even did anything

In fairness, they really gave it to the idea of Obama [artvoice.com] much more so than to Obama himself. And really, the idea of Obama is what many people voted for, while in the end we have all received for president the man Obama.

Re:Worthless (-1, Flamebait)

RightSaidFred99 (874576) | more than 3 years ago | (#35083016)

That's because people are stupid. I really like the idea of a heaven full of puppy dogs, rainbows, and super models - but I know how ridiculous on every level that is so I don't go off myself to get there sooner.

The only person dumber than a second-term Dubya voter is a first-term Obama voter.

But he's so well spoken!

Jesus Christ.

Peace? (1, Interesting)

RussellSHarris (1385323) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082626)

I wouldn't say that WikiLeaks has contributed very much to peace. More like it has contributed rather toward strife.

Peace is overrated anyway. Don't they say conflict builds character?

Re:Peace? (2)

EkriirkE (1075937) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082990)

Many times you need strife to attain peace.

Re:Peace? (2)

sxeraverx (962068) | more than 3 years ago | (#35083104)

Premise 1: The Nobel Peace Prize is to be awarded to the person 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."

Premise 2: Wikileaks is a whistleblowing site.

Premise 3: "Secret secrets are no fun. Secret secrets hurt someone."

Argument: Wikileaks reveal secrets. Secrets discourage "fraternity between nations", specifically between nations that aren't privy to the secrets. Although there may be tension in the short run, along with the corresponding increase in standing armies and reduction in fraternity between nations that share the secrets, in the long run, the fewer secrets that are secret, the more nations realize that they can't do bad things in secret, and thus the better the situation becomes between nations.

Conclusion: Wikileaks merits the Nobel Peace Prize.

Another dissident..? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35082630)

I doubt the small panel of politicians that decides have the guts to nominate a Western dissident.

It should be a Chinese, Burmese, or Iranian dissdent, but not any of our own controversial figures. /W

The Nobel Peace Prize is a joke (2, Insightful)

rs1n (1867908) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082632)

The last prize was given to a man (Obama) as a tool to promote peace, and not because of past contributions of the recipient toward peace. The world was tired of the Bush administration and their pro-war foreign policy, and the committee was banking on Obama making a change by giving him a major incentive to do so. Now it has become even more of a political tool with the nomination of Wikileaks. I cannot see how people can remain objective when it comes to considering Wikileaks as a candidate for the peace prize given the political controversy surrounding it.

Re:The Nobel Peace Prize is a joke (0)

He-Ja (1187145) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082678)

I did not read past the first setence of your comment. The last Nobel Peace prize was not given to Obama.

Re:The Nobel Peace Prize is a joke (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35082742)

I did not read past the first setence of your comment.

Great way to encourage discussion! Bark when a single point is mistaken and ignore everything following it.

The last Nobel Peace prize was not given to Obama.

Last winner (awarded in absentia) was Liu Xiaobo.

Re:The Nobel Peace Prize is a joke (1)

drakaan (688386) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082816)

Here, now you can read past the first sentence and properly respond to the OP:

The 2009 prize was given to a man (Obama) as a tool to promote peace, and not because of past contributions of the recipient toward peace. The world was tired of the Bush administration and their pro-war foreign policy, and the committee was banking on Obama making a change by giving him a major incentive to do so. Now it has become even more of a political tool with the nomination of Wikileaks. I cannot see how people can remain objective when it comes to considering Wikileaks as a candidate for the peace prize given the political controversy surrounding it.

Re:The Nobel Peace Prize is a joke (2)

Nadaka (224565) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082840)

He is probably in China, and therefore does not know that the last Nobel peace prize was given to a "terrorist" under house arrest for the unthinkable crime of handing out leaflets that were not 100% supportive of his glorious leaders.

Re:The Nobel Peace Prize is a joke (1)

rs1n (1867908) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082850)

You are right. The last prize was given to Liu Xiaobo. That does not change the fact that the Nobel Peace Prize is really just a political tool. In fact, when you consider Liu Xiaobo as a winner, and the fact that his name was essentially blotted out of the news in China, it only confirms what I wrote earlier. In the country in which that prize SHOULD have mattered most, the citizens were likely not even aware of it.

Re:The Nobel Peace Prize is a joke (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35082758)

The last prize was given to a man (Obama) as a tool to promote peace, and not because of past contributions of the recipient toward peace.

You mean the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize. The last one was given to Liu Xiaobo.

Re:The Nobel Peace Prize is a joke (2)

thetagger (1057066) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082792)

Here's a hint: in most parts of the world, Wikileaks is celebrated without "but"s or "if"s . Just because your country in particular is different doesn't mean much in the overall picture. The fact that it Wikileaks generates controversy in your country says more about your country than Wikileaks.

Re:The Nobel Peace Prize is a joke (1)

drakaan (688386) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082992)

...and the wisdom of the crowd is always right, then? I'm going to go re-read 1984 with that in mind.

The reason Wikileaks generates controversy in the US is that there is diversity of opinion here. We aren't all of one mind on a huge number of issues.

I personally think that what Assange did is fine (he's a civilian), and the soldier who broke just about every opsec-related rule there is should be court-martialed, but that's not the topic.

The question of whether Wikileaks deserves a nomination focuses narrowly on individual observations of how exactly Wikileaks has contributed to peace on our planet. I think it's very much an open argument as to whether the information they have released has made the world more or less peaceful. That determination is completely separate from whether or not Wikileaks is a good thing, which I believe it is, on the whole.

Re:The Nobel Peace Prize is a joke (1)

basotl (808388) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082838)

Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2009. Liu Xiaobo was the last to be awarded in 2010 and arguably a more deserving individual.

Re:The Nobel Peace Prize is a joke (2)

vux984 (928602) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082882)

The last prize was given to a man (Obama) as a tool to promote peace...

Actually the last prize was given to Liu Xiaobo.

The prize for Obama... I'm mixed. I think his rhetoric and election message was a genuine force for world peace, even though he wasn't president and hadn't done anything policy-wise. He was an advocate for peace, and that message reached and affected a lot of people.

I don't necessarily know that he was the single most significant advocate for peace of the year... but I don't begrudge him the award.

I cannot see how people can remain objective when it comes to considering Wikileaks as a candidate for the peace prize given the political controversy surrounding it.

Given the political nature of peace itself, its hard to imagine that candidates won't be politically controversial from time to time.

Re:The Nobel Peace Prize is a joke (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35082904)

What do you mean, "it has become"? The Nobel Peace Prize has always been controversial; it's really in the nature of the prize.

Of course, if your perception of the Nobel Peace Prize rests on nothing but the fact that Obama received it, then I hope you'll forgive me for saying that maybe you should read up a bit on it before you talk about it. You apparently don't know what it stands for, what it's awarded for, by whom, how the recipient is chosen, what its history is, what past recipients there have been, or anything else for that matter.

Re:The Nobel Peace Prize is a joke (2)

drgregoryhouse (1909704) | more than 3 years ago | (#35083038)

This is a quote taken from my local newspaper, by Raj Patel on American discontent with President Obama.
"A lot of us thought of him as the pizza delivery guy of change, where we would sit on our couches and he would being hot, steaming change in 30 minutes."

Which leads me to think, cultures and civilization can be easily destroyed by the drop of a bomb, to rebuild that will take time.

WikiLeaks = Heroes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35082704)

The Nobel peace prize is meaningless at this point, but I do agree that without question the people at WikiLeaks are heros and should be commended for their efforts. I wish mainstream press was a principled as WikiLeaks.

Re:WikiLeaks = Heroes (1)

M1FCJ (586251) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082876)

Just because it's been given to people you don't share political views with does not mean it's meaningless. Luckily the rest of the world and the distinguished list of Nobel Peace Prize winners disagree with you.

Kissinger and Obama got one (1)

quantic_oscillation7 (973678) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082730)

so....it became meaningless... i don't think wikileaks guys want to have such fellow companions!

Re:Kissinger and Obama got one (2)

hoferbr (707935) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082962)

Well... Dalai Lama, Desmond Tutu, José Ramos-Horta, Nelson Mandela, Mother Teresa... The list of great people who won the Peace Nobel goes on and on. You have to look at the big picture here, instead of focusing on United States petty politics.

far from deserving (0)

TinWalrus (896897) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082764)

how can he be nominated for the nobel peace prize when he has irrevocably endangered our nations military folks? while i can appreciate this persons motives, i could never agree with his methods.

Re:far from deserving(NOT!) (1, Flamebait)

drgregoryhouse (1909704) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082896)

Just who has been endangered or is it just a speculation? Citation needed please. Probably just FUD from those exposed by wikileaks.

In Totally Unrelated News... (5, Funny)

The O Rly Factor (1977536) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082772)

All members of the Nobel Committee have been apprehended by the US government, due to suspicion by the US government that they are aiding in terrorist activities.

Stuxnet (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35082790)

The creators of Stuxnet should get the peace prize for setting Iran's nuclear goals back a few years. Hopefully no one will use the code for evil...

Absurd (2)

Gunkerty Jeb (1950964) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082812)

The Nobel Committee is losing it. I'd love to receive the Nobel Peace Prize for telling people a bunch of shit they already know.

Makes sense (4, Insightful)

tylersoze (789256) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082822)

Since they've already given out two Nobel Peace Prizes for "not being George W Bush" (Gore and Obama) stands to reason a third would be in order.

Man, just think how awful of a President you have to be that people get prizes for being the exact opposite of you.

Re:Makes sense (2)

Nadaka (224565) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082974)

Obama is hardly the exact opposite of Bush. He has slightly darker skin and curlier hair, but most of his actual policy is aligned with Bush to within a few percent.

Hang 'em high. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35082824)

Wikileaks needs to be nominated for the gallows. Every last one of the traitorous bastards. A 7.62 in the head is an acceptable alternative, so long as it's public.

"ONE" of this century's contributors ? (2, Insightful)

unity100 (970058) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082848)

As far as the last 30 years concerned, they are the ONLY source that has contributed to freedom of speech and the public knowing what their governments were doing. last major flop was during watergate, and both the governments and corporations learned how to deal with that - buy buying out all media into conglomerates. result ? no watergate in the last 30 years.

and no, cryptome, unfortunately, didnt mean shit.

first, they didnt have any success in bringing the issues to the masses into mass media - they never went into danger and publicity like wikileaks did, so it was easy for mainstream media to totally ignore them - just like how they totally kept public in the dark about acta, if you want an example -

and,

they were inflitrated by nsa right at the start :

http://bsd.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1910704&cid=34556662 [slashdot.org]

rendering them totally ineffective.

I just picutre... (1)

alobar72 (974422) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082940)

The Szene: Torture chamber, guantanamo, seven floors downstairs. A guard steps over to the poor fellow who leaked some stuff and says: "congrats, buddy - those wikileakians just won the Nobel price with your leaked documents... We will keep you here for another 10 years " :)

I'd nominate Mark Zuckerberg & Jack Dorsey (1)

mozumder (178398) | more than 3 years ago | (#35082968)

If it weren't for them, the events going on in the mid-east right now wouldn't happen.

There, I said it. Agreed?

Anti Nobel (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35083002)

Who is going to start the Anti-Nobel website? I think this would be a good place to detail where the atrocities and censorship. Pictures, examples, financial statements. Top 10 list. links to legal offices that work specifically in corruption.

Meaningless. (5, Insightful)

BaronHethorSamedi (970820) | more than 3 years ago | (#35083020)

The Nobel Peace Prize, according to Alfred Nobel's will, should be awarded to the person (or organization) 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."

Whatever you might think about WikiLeaks' contributions to free speech politics, government transparency, etc., it's hard to see how it's filled any of those criteria. The release of diplomatic cables arguably did a lot to damage fraternity between nations.

Of course, as others have observed, it seems to have been some time since the letter of Nobel's will has meant anything to the Peace Prize committee.

Wikileaks did not cause the Tunisian revolt (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35083064)

Wikileaks did not cause the Tunisian revolt. The corruption of the ruling family has been known for years

http://www.youtube.com/user/Nawaat#p/u/8/XRW2BJOewcc

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...