Quote:
Originally posted by MaggieL
At least one comittee member disagrees, and the chairman was either speaking for himself, or violating Comittee rules by taking part in public debates after the award is announced. .
...
Another member of the prize committee, Inger-Marie Ytterhorn, challenged Mr. Berge's observations. "The way I see it, that was not the intention of the committee," she said in an interview with NRK radio...
|
A conservative member of the five person board not only disagreed with Mr Berge's comments. That person had also nominated Tony Blair and George Jr for the Peace Prize! George Jr for the Nobel Peace Prize? Of course that person would perfer not to agree with the committee majority or with Mr Berge's explicit statement. That person, as a supporter of George Jr, was in direct contradicition with the majority Nobel Peace Prize committee.
The committee's announcement began: "In a situation currently marked by threats of the use of power, Mr. Carter. . ."
Nobel Peace Prize is about politics. It is why the five member board is chosen by the Norwegian Parliament. It is why the committee selected a reporter who had exposed Hitler's military rearment and was jailed in a concentration camp for same. (The committee also prefaced his award with "This is for a journalist who opposed militarism.") It is why Desmond Tutu was selected during the turmoil of S Africa in 1984. Why Lech Walesa was selected in 1983 making the communist goverment in Poland very unhappy.
The committee made a clear statement about the militarism of George Jr. A conservative who nominated George Jr for the peace prize disagrees. Of course. How could one agree with the committee's conclusion after having nominated a militarist for the prize? The committee's comment should be a wakeup call to those who have not notice how badly George Jr has undermined America's relationships with virtually every nation in the world.
Amazing since he may not even have know half those nations existed when he was running for president.