Slashdot Mirror


Edward Snowden Nominated For Nobel Peace Prize

An anonymous reader writes "A Swedish professor of sociology has nominated Snowden for the 2014 Nobel Peace Prize. Giving him the prize would also 'save the Nobel Peace Prize from the disrepute that incurred by the hasty and ill-conceived decision to award U.S. President Barack Obama' the prize, according to professor Stefan Svallfors. He notes ultimately that at great personal cost, 'Edward Snowden has helped to make the world a little bit better and safer.'"

31 of 719 comments (clear)

  1. Definitely... by Smivs · · Score: 5, Insightful

    a good idea. This would send a positive message to arrogant governments everywhere.

    1. Re:Definitely... by Xest · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Even better, take Obama's away and give it to Snowden.

    2. Re:Definitely... by gl4ss · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Mod parent up.

      How the leader of one of the most warmongering nations on Earth got awarded a Nobel Peace Prize is beyond me.

      well, he promised to shutdown gitmo, bring peace to middle east, stop collateral killings when killing people branded criminals without a trial etc.. you know, change. surely he should have managed to do at least one of them...

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    3. Re:Definitely... by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Even better, take Obama's away and give it to Snowden.

      If I were Snowden, I'd rather hang myself than to join the kind of people who actually got it. Who'd ever want to be associated with a bunch of scumbags?

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    4. Re:Definitely... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Funny

      Mod parent up.

      How the leader of one of the most warmongering nations on Earth got awarded a Nobel Peace Prize is beyond me.

      We will bleed the ground red with those who oppose our peace-efforts!

    5. Re:Definitely... by 1s44c · · Score: 5, Insightful

      How the leader of one of the most warmongering nations on Earth got awarded a Nobel Peace Prize is beyond me.

      They gave it to Obama because he wasn't Bush. They had the idea that because Obama wasn't Bush he would behave differently and step back on the warmongering.

      Turns out they were wrong.

    6. Re:Definitely... by JackieBrown · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's why you give prizes to people after they complete the task.

    7. Re:Definitely... by jittles · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I fear Snowden will be a martyr. Plentiful people in power don't like it when their secretive ops and motives are exposed for the world to see. The sausage of politics is ugly enough. Snowden is a modern-day Sinclair Lewis in that regard.

      Obama's premature prize baffles me, save that in his own country, there are plentiful people in power that didn't want an individual outside of their control to take power. Given Obama's unfulfilled promises, they needn't have bothered in their worry.

      I"m surprised to see that you think that Obama was ever out of someones control. His meteoric rise to political power was so fast that I find it hard to believe he doesn't have some very rich and powerful people calling most of his shots. Did anyone really know his name prior to the 2004 Democratic Convention? I certainly had not really heard his name until the 2008 Democratic Primary began.

      In any event, I don't see how anyone can become a politician at that level in this country without being corrupt. Which is why we need to fix the system.

    8. Re:Definitely... by postbigbang · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Odd that you should cite this.

      Obama replaced Ryan, an Illinois senatorial scumbag. Illinois is a hotbed of political chicanery.

      I can recall probably 120 reps, half the senate and each and every president and VP. My faculties are different than most Americans. I voted for Obama in both presidential elections based on hope, the hope that there might be some political change away from the corruption we now face in the US. I wanted to see the vacuous wars stanched to all parties satisfaction. I hoped for regulation that was gleefully stanched during the Bush and Clinton administrations. I wanted to see people come together, not be compartmentalized and marginalized. Didn't happen. We're barely holding it together, but it's been both been better and worse during my long life.

      All the altrusitic things I was taught in grade school and high school civics classes have been stanched by the motives of greed and fear. Once in a long while, common sense takes hold, but only for brief moments. Then something else happens. I fear for my grandchildren.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
  2. Peace Prize by benjfowler · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Adolf Hitler was nominated for the Peace Prize in 1939.

    Henry Kissinger got the Nobel Peace Prize for bombing the shit out of Vietnam and Cambodia.

    Obama got the Peace Prize doing sweet FA.

    The fact that somebody was either nominated for the Peace Prize, or actually won it, does not actually mean much.

  3. no, no it won't by argStyopa · · Score: 5, Insightful

    " 'save the Nobel Peace Prize from the disrepute that incurred by the hasty and ill-conceived decision to award U.S. President Barack Obama' "

    No, it won't.
    You're far, far too late on that one.

    --
    -Styopa
    1. Re:no, no it won't by blueg3 · · Score: 5, Informative

      The Nobel Peace Prize and scientific Nobel prizes are decided on by completely different groups. The only thing they have in common is the word "Nobel". The scientific prizes are decided by the Swedish Academy of Sciences. The Peace prize is decided by an independent body, the Norwegian Nobel Committee.

      The Nobel Peace Prize has always been political.

  4. Re:You have got to be kidding me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Not technically illegal".
    Gotta love when a justification starts with that one.

  5. hasty by nitehawk214 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    hasty and ill-conceived decision to award U.S. President Barack Obama

    Because this isn't hasty orill-conceived. This does prove, however, that the Nobel Peace Prize is designed to be awarded to whomever is popular in the news currently before the public forgets them and moves on to the next disaster. Who is next for the Nobel PP? Trayvon Martin? Or is that story already run its course since the trial is over?

    --
    I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
  6. Doesn't the winner need to... by mitcheli · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Actually be responsible for bringing peace to the world? Barack Obama didn't do anything to promote peace when he first took office, and Snowden hasn't done anything "yet" to promote peace either. Nothing saying that what he did might not later, but should we not at least wait to see how the drama unfolds first before we award the medal?

    --
    Select from tblFriends where interesting >= 4;
  7. I have an idea by slashmydots · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Someone should give Obama the "best arming of rebels" award now too just to really rub in how stupid that decision was. Foreigners need to keep their opinions and million dollar prizes out of our elections. Snowden, however, should get one. Well, except that he probably worsened foreign relationships and might actually cause a war. But just on merit, why not?

    1. Re:I have an idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      In light of Snowden's revelations, it is more than a little rich for Americans to say that foreigners should stay out of American affairs.

  8. Re:Nice by 1s44c · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So the Nobel Peace Prize = "I HATE AMERICA" Prize.

    Not really. It's meant to be a prize for making the world more peaceful. Giving it to Obama was nuts, and it's now not clear if this prize has any point any more.

  9. About that "treason" thing... by SirGarlon · · Score: 5, Informative

    I have bad news for you about that "treason" term you throw around so casually. If you read the _whole_ Constitution instead of just the fashionable parts, you'll find that treason has a very specific definition in Article 3, Section 3. While I agree that the NSA programs are illegal, "the people" {{which ones?}} at NSA didn't meet the definition of treason. Not even close.

    --
    [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
  10. Not better or safer by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The world isn't better or safer because of what he's done - it might be one day, but for now we're just slightly better informed.

    If there was a Nobel prize for good intentions, sure, give him that.

    And let's not forget, Snowden didn't do this in the name of safety (certainly not his own). He did it in the name of liberty.

    Still, he deserves it a lot more than some.

    --
    systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
  11. Re:Nice by mwvdlee · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Is that because "peace" = "hate America" or "America" = "hate peace"?

    --
    Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
  12. Re:You have got to be kidding me by 1s44c · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You are missing the massive difference between legal and right. In Nazi Germany it was legal to kill Jews if you were employed to do that.

    If all you care about is what's legal what do you think your country is turning into?

  13. Re:Nice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And the other world powers that have multicultural prime ministers and presidents are ... ? I feel like Obama's Peace Prize was more about transcending race and color finally among the world's super powers. France is super liberal but you'll never seen someone of Algerian descent as their prime minister.

    And maybe that proves the point that the color of the your skin really shouldn't matter at all, either when discriminating or when promoting "multiculturalism"? I mean, Obama is just more of the same. They gave him the Nobel Peace Prize because they bought into the whole "hope and change" bandwagon, but then he turned out to be third and fourth terms of Bush.

    Why should I care what color the President is, one way or the other?

  14. Re:You have got to be kidding me by mwvdlee · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Forget about the consistution; it doesn't contain an infallible or eternal truth.
    Do you think this type of spying is right? If you think it should be forbidden and the law doesn't agree; change the law.
    Laws reflect the moral code of it's subjects. Do laws that allow these activities still reflect yours?

    --
    Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
  15. Re:Nice by substance2003 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How is nominating for a peace prize to Edward Snowden interpreted as hatred to America?

    Why can't it be equal to saying that 'we're against unauthorized intrusive spying on you're own citizens'?
    Why do people need to degenerate this into hate mongering against an entire country rather than what it is. A critic of a part or it's government going rogue?

  16. Re:Nice by Joce640k · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And the other world powers that have multicultural prime ministers and presidents are ... ? I feel like Obama's Peace Prize was more about transcending race and color finally among the world's super powers. France is super liberal but you'll never seen someone of Algerian descent as their prime minister.

    The major cause of war/unrest in the world isn't skin color, it's religion. I'd be more interested in seeing an openly Atheist president than a black one but I'm not holding my breath on that happening in the USA anytime soon.

    --
    No sig today...
  17. This is meaningless by David+Gerard · · Score: 5, Informative

    Literally thousands of people are nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize every year. Nominating just means someone has sent in a letter suggesting them. Nomination is not in any way noteworthy.

    --
    http://rocknerd.co.uk
  18. Re:Nice by luis_a_espinal · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So the Nobel Peace Prize = "I HATE AMERICA" Prize.

    Not really. It's meant to be a prize for making the world more peaceful. Giving it to Obama was nuts, and it's now not clear if this prize has any point any more.

    No. Giving it to Obama was controversial. Giving it to Yasser Arafat and Yitzhak Rabin, and not giving it to Gandhi, now that was, is and will ever be nuts. Another nuts (read stupid) decision? Giving it to Al Gore while completely ignoring Holocaust savior and survivor Irena Sendler who saved 2,500 Jewish children during WII (acts for which she was detained, tortured, sentenced to death but miraculously survived.)

    The Nobel Peace price not about peace. It's about political posturing.

  19. Re:Nice by gameboyhippo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    While there's no denying that many wars have been fought under the guise of religion; I'm sure people can make war just fine (and they have in the past) without religion.

  20. Re:Nice by Seumas · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Religion".

    I don't think you understand what that word means, yet like so many religious people, try to spread it around to every context to poison any argument.

    Also, of course there are a lot of militant atheists out there. The same way there are/were a lot of militant "black people" out there. Guess what? When people trod all over you, threaten you, treat you like second class citizens, and impose their will (via legislation and political power) on you -- you're probably going to be a tad mother fucking militant.

    "Stop being intolerant of my intolerance you assholes! C'mon guys!"

  21. Re: What would Benjamin Franklin say about Snowden by colordev · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Fact is Snowden sacrificed himself so that people would know about (what he considered) unconstitutional searches and universal violations of universal human rights- right?

    "Freedom of speech is a principal pillar of a free government; when this support is taken away, the constitution of a free society is dissolved, and tyranny is erected on its ruins. Republics and limited monarchies derive their strength and vigor from a popular examination into the action of the magistrates.

    "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."

    Maybe the PATRIOT ACT has made you think these kinds of writings are particularly unamerican? Or you could just accept the fact that Snowden's acts are just as american as were the actions of founding fathers of the United States; who were also temporarily considered traitors.

    Also consider that now Snowden has higher approval rating than... US Congress and Barack Obama

    ...and I'm sure, all over the world, Edward Snowden has a higher approval rating than NSA.

    Now, how were you supposed "to institute a new Government"? Oh you can't. And if you'd even become interested about it the government would know about it; thanks to PRISM.

    "whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute a new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles, and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

    I think Snowden is well worth one Nobel Peace Prize.