Edward Snowden nominated for Nobel peace prize

[another_liberal]

Source: The Guardian

Two Norwegian politicians say they have jointly nominated former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden for the 2014 Nobel peace prize. Socialist politicians Baard Vegar Solhjell, a former environment minister, and Snorre Valen said the public debate and policy changes "in the wake of Snowden's whistleblowing has contributed to a more stable and peaceful world order".

Being nominated means Snowden will be one of scores of names that the Nobel committee will consider for the prestigious award. The five-member panel will not confirm who has been nominated but those who submit nominations sometimes make them public.

Nominators, including members of national parliaments and governments, university professors and previous laureates, must enter their submissions by 1 February. The prize committee members can add their own candidates at their first meeting after that deadline.


Read more: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/29/edward-snowden-nominated-nobel-peace-prize

---

Take that, General Alexander!

I hope it really irritates our Spy Masters at the NSA.

[bananas]

1. He deserves it!

:applaud:

[unreadierLizard]

2. Couldn't think of a more deserving person. n/t

[AzDar]

3. Hope he gets it.

[Kelvin Mace]

4. Not to rain on anyone's parade but,

the nomination process is not exactly exclusive:

Qualified Nominators

According to the statutes of the Nobel Foundation, a nomination is considered valid if it is submitted by a person who falls within one of the following categories:
• Members of national assemblies and governments of states
• Members of international courts
• University rectors; professors of social sciences, history, philosophy, law and theology; directors of peace research institutes and foreign policy institutes
• Persons who have been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize
• Board members of organizations that have been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize
• 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)
• Former advisers to the Norwegian Nobel Committee )

http://www.nobelprize.org/nomination/peace/index.html

By this criteria, Ted Cruz could nominate the cast of Duck Dynasty.

Also, don't know that I would want to belong to a fraternity that includes Henry Kissenger.

[jakeXT]

7. .

[LynneSin]

11. Rush Limbaugh has been nominated a few times

That's why I put absolutely no value whatsoever in people being nominated.

[Kelvin Mace]

25. Precisely

Hard to take such things seriously.

[RC]

12. What do you think of Barack Obama receiving the prize?

[KittyWampus]

18. You think Snowden will actually RECEIVE the NPP? LOL

[RC]

21. He might. He deserves it more than Keith Alexander does.

Wouldn't you agree?

[Kelvin Mace]

24. To be perfectly honest

I don't think it was deserved. The guy gets elected in November, and gets the prize about 2-3 months later if memory serves.

Also, in light of his failure to pull out of Iraq/Afghanistan in a timely manner (in the case of Afghanistan, not at all), it is doubly undeserved.

Some will claim that Congress was the barrier, but the only barrier was political. To have withdrawn from both countries immediately would have underscored the illegality of the war, and since the administration had no intention of conducting war crimes trials, it tacitly endorsed the war.

[Fearless]

83. +1000!

[another_liberal]

33. Maybe so . . .

But there would be no chance in hell that Duck Dynasty would get a single vote. Edward Snowden, however, has a very good chance of winning the prize, and by unanimous consent.

[Kelvin Mace]

45. You are a very optimistic person

But I am guessing it wouldn't be hard to find a bookie willing to give 100:1 against.

[another_liberal]

48. Maybe ten to one . . .

But that is just a given with this kind of bet.

[MattSh]

5. Wait! What's that sound I hear?

Sounds like frothing! Take cover everyone!

[Cryptoad]

6. How Funny!

[MADem]

8. Rush Limbaugh got nominated a half dozen years back, too....

Validimir Putin was nominated as well.

Getting nominated isn't terribly difficult. You just have to be a legislator, a university professor, former recipients, or members of this group or that to submit a nomination.

[7962]

10. Beat me to it!

[another_liberal]

34. See my reply to Kelvin Mace . . .

. . . above on this same string.

[MADem]

37. Time will tell. Rush really thought he had a shot, too... nt

[another_liberal]

38. As for Rush . . .

That was the Oxycontin talking.

[MADem]

40. Far be it from me to ascribe anyone's sincerely held--if inaccurate--beliefs to drug use! nt

[LynneSin]

56. Well in 2057 maybe Rush will be able to finally say 'I TOLD YOU SO'

I think it was 2007 when he made the claims so that means in 2057 (50 years after the award was given out) that we will actually know the truth.

[DeSwiss]

9. K&R!!!

- If he wins, it might be a little awkward at the Peace Prize Alumni Party 5 years from now.....

[LynneSin]

13. Anyone who thinks this is amazing clearly has no clue how the nominating process works

First off, the Nobel Prize people never ever post who has been nominated. This isn't the Oscars where we have a whole 2-3 months where we can set up office pools to pick who will win from the list of nominees. Once a year the NP folks will announce who won and we can only speculate who that person or group was up again. In fact the actual list of the nominees are actually sealed for 50 years. So we technically will never know who was up for nomination until 2064.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Prize#Nominations
Nomination forms are sent by the Nobel Committee to about 3,000 individuals, usually in September the year before the prizes are awarded. These individuals are often academics working in a relevant area. For the Peace Prize, inquiries are sent to governments, members of international courts, professors and rectors, former Peace Prize laureates and current or former members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee. The deadline for the return of the nomination forms is 31 January of the year of the award.[44][45] The Nobel Committee nominates about 300 potential laureates from these forms and additional names.[46] The nominees are not publicly named, nor are they told that they are being considered for the prize. All nomination records for a prize are sealed for 50 years from the awarding of the prize

Having said that, to actually get your name on the list isn't that difficult, you just need to know the right people. And in the past there have been some very odd claims as to people who have been nominated. I mean even Rush Limbaugh claims to have been nominated for the prize. I remember some doctor who claimed Terri Schaivo was not truly brain dead use to claim he was nominated for the Medicine award. People make these claims all the time and in the end it's difficult to dispute since it'll take 50 years to actually prove it.

So as for 'irritating our Spy Masters' I highly doubt it. Knowing how the process works and knowing some of the clowns that have said have been nominated this is just par for the course.

[Herman D]

14. Snowden deserves two things:

1) The Nobel Peace Price
2) A Full Presidential Pardon

[Demeter]

15. and full honors as an American Patriot in the True sense of the word

not the plastic Tea Party patriotism, not the violent NRA style, stand-your-ground patriotism, and DEFINITELY not the 1% Elitist version!

He is a Pete Seeger style Patriot. Which wouldn't be a bad name for the medal!

[catbyte]

17. Except Snowdon is a 2nd Amendment gun nut, wants to abolish Social Security, hates Obama

and only became a "whistle-blower" when Obama was elected & he donated to Ron Paul in 2012. Yeah, a real fucking hero.

[MADem]

39. Shhhhhhh! No dissing Saint Ed!

You'll upset the people who think that Anonymous isn't riddled with FBI informants!

[Demeter]

67. You MIGHT want to do a fact-check

and you OUGHT to do a link instead of making unsupported slander. We have standards here.

[catbyte]

68. Pardon the hell out of me. So sorry for "slandering" St. Eddie. Here ya go:

http://pullingtotheleft.wordpress.com/2013/07/06/edward-snowden-nra-supporter-who-loved-domestic-spying-when-it-was-bush-and-hated-it-when-it-was-obama/

Or this:

http://blogs.e-rockford.com/applesauce/2013/07/08/meet-edward-snowden-gun-nut-obama-hater-foe-of-social-security-fan-of-government-spying/#axzz2rp9wP9yE

Yeah, a real fucking hero.

[Demeter]

71. Neither of these are what they call "reputable" sources around here.

[catbyte]

74. Dig through the website he posted on like I did. Jesus Christ. I have been a DU

member for 12 fucking years. I know what's what. We just don't agree.

[reusrename]

76. I'm just not all that impressed with what you think you know.

The guy didn't just fall off the turnip truck. He needed access to do what he's done.

You should really try and focus on what he's telling everyone now, in public, and on the record.

You should also try and focus on how he was able to gain such access. I've worked for the MIC so perhaps I have a more knowledgeable view about this stuff than some other folks do.

[catbyte]

79. Yeah, he snookered people out of their logins & passwords as "administrator"

Look, he unearthed some valuable stuff, but the hero worship of him around here is creepy. Anybody saying anything the least little bit critical of his motives or character gets attacked. I just don't get it.

[reusrename]

80. At least you're honest about it.

This is probably a more dangerous dynamic than the nuclear issue we faced when I was growing up. Nuclear detente (including the whole MAD concept) was something the world had never faced before and it was a difficult subject with much at stake.

Having lived through it, I honestly believe the stakes are even higher now with this new technology.

"It's the economy metadata stoopid!" - James Carville

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023347631

I doubt that it's possible to roll back this technology. We need to figure out a way forward.

[catbyte]

72. Want more? Here:

His disdain of President Obama and his policies was apparent and he bitched about them with “increasing frequency.” But there are two issues where, I believe, where Snowden’s true colors shine very clearly. This is one:

SNOWDEN: save money? cut this social security bullshit

User11: hahahayes

User18: Yeah! Fuck old people!

User11: social security is bullshit

User11: let’s just toss old people out in the street

User18: Old people could move in with [User11].

User11: NOOO

User11: they smell funny

SNOWDEN: Somehow, our society managed to make it hundreds of years without social security just fine

SNOWDEN: you fucking retards

SNOWDEN: Magically the world changed after the new deal, and old people became made of glass

SNOWDEN: yeah, that makes sense

User11: wow

User11: you are just so fucking stupid

SNOWDEN: yeah, [User11]. and you’re quite a gem

User19: and magically, life expectancy has doubled in the last 100 years.funny how that works.

SNOWDEN: [User19], you don’t think modern medicine has something to do with that? no? it’s social security? wow. I guess I missed that.

User11: hurr wait a second, life expectancy has shot up in recent times along with the dissolution of the communal family unit in exchange for the nuclear family

User11: gee i guess we might need to create a safety net for the sudden glut of helpless elderly????

SNOWDEN: they wouldn’t be fucking helpless if you weren’t sending them fucking checks to sit on their ass and lay in hospitals all day

User11: you are so goddamned stupd*pid

User11: PUT OLD PEOPLE TO WORK IN THE FIELDS

SNOWDEN: my grandmother is eighty fucking three this year, and you know what? she still supports herself working as a goddamned hairdresser



“Fuck old people”? An objectivist view if ever there was one. The other issue is the Second Amendment:

User: the restrictions were made to appease the conservatives to get another bill passed. fucking cons.

SNOWDEN: See, that’s why I’m goddamned glad for the second amendment. Me and all my lunatic, gun-toting NRA compatriots would be on the steps of Congress before the C-Span feed finished.
----------
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/07/06/have-we-all-been-fooled-by-edward-snowden/

This is the website where he posted all that despicable shit:

http://arstechnica.com/about-us/

[Thinkingabout]

77. Do ya really think they want the truth? Good post.

[toby jo]

19. Saw a snip O giving the Presidential Medal of Freedom

to Oprah on news this morning. Maybe he can switch up his priorities.

[aquart]

44. And at least ten years in a federal prison.

And that's me being lenient.

[rtracey]

16. so

and when he goes to Sweden to get his "award".....grab him and bring him back. Maybe he can wear his award proudly in Levenworth

[Carolina]

20. Wrong!

Snowden should be free and Bushco should be in Levenworth

Who's the traitor?
Who violated the Constitution?
What has Snowden gained for himself, how has he profited (profit being the key word, low poster) from revealing the TRUTH about the NSA vs look how much the BFEE and its aiders/abetters have been enriched by their theft of power, their lies and their wars (their death, destruction and debt)!

[L0oniX]

27. ^^^this^^^

[another_liberal]

32. True!

And it is not too late.

[SoapBox]

23. [phone]

[SoapBox]

22. Good for Russia!

Oh goody for Comrade Eddie, former American.

[bitchkitty]

70. Comrade? You are

aware that Russia is no longer Communist?

[L0oniX]

26. K & R

[zonkers]

28. Holy shit. This is a game changer.

[LynneSin]

29. Really? Did you think Rush Limbaugh's nomination was a game changer

Please read the above comments about the nomination process. If you have the right connections you could be nominated for the prize and in the end there is no real proof of the nomination since the Nobel Prize folks seal the nominees list for 50 years. In the end anyone could technically claim they were nominated without worrying about whether or not they are telling the truth.

Not that I'm saying that Snowden is lying, but just how the process works. This isn't the Oscars - we will never truly know all the people who were nominated and how they got nominated and even if their nomination got thru the process.

It just sounds like 2 politicians in Norway decided to put him on the list. When you think of it 2 tea party aligned politicans here in the states could do the same thing for Tony Perkins or Fred Phelps if they really wanted too.

[another_liberal]

31. Rush Limbaugh never had a ghost of a chance to win.

Edward Snowden, on the other hand, has a very good chance of winning.

Do you really think a Nobel Peace Prize would have no effect on his situation?

[LynneSin]

35. I think he has about as much chance as the 300-500 other nominees

This isn't the Oscars or Grammys. The Nobel Prize Committee does not give us the list of nominees so we can all start our office pools as to who will win. That list is sealed for 50 years. So in the end when you hear people make claims of nomination in reality you're making an assumption that whomever submitted the name got thru all the nomination process to be considered. Because of this process it's very common for people to brag about nominations because really - who can prove someone wrong if no one will see the list for 50 years.

As for your second statement - if he won then yes it would. Even I would have no doubt about that. But as a 'nominee' it is foolish to think there's any positive/game changer meaning to it.

[another_liberal]

36. You may be underestimating how much the rest of the World hates . . .

All I can say is that you may be underestimating how much the rest of the World hates what our NSA is doing to their privacy.

We shall see.

[LynneSin]

41. Not at all

Last edited Wed Jan 29, 2014, 01:17 PM - Edit history (1)

I'm just a realist about the nomination process and understand the reasoning as to why the process is setup as it is.

It's that old adage of counting chickens before they are hatched.

The folks that created the Nobel Prize setup the nomination process for that exact reason - they wanted to honor a person in a specific field but they didn't want people going around using the concept of 'I'm a Nobel Prize Nominee' as part of their resume. When someone puts any kind of claim of importance that 'Well I was nominated for a Nobel Prize' then you know they are full of crap or very very very old (old enough to get nominated and then wait the 50 years to confirm they were telling the truth when the list is unsealed).

But don't get me wrong - if he wins and he could if his name is really truly on the list being considered, then it is a big deal. But until the awards are announced the article is nothing more than trivial gossip.

And a late edit note comment:

From the original article
Two Norwegian politicians say they have jointly nominated

In the end all we know is that 2 people say they have nominated Snowden. Maybe they have and maybe not but in the end we won't know if this is the truth unless 2 things happen - Snowden actually wins the Nobel (which means that yes indeed he was nominated) or it's 2064.

[zonkers]

61. Ahh. Thank you.

[LynneSin]

66. yw and btw I am not trying to be anti-Snowden

Just trying to make people understand how the Nobel Prize system works.

I'm reading all these posts and other articles outside DU being writen about Snowden's 'nomination' and it's annoying that people assume that there was an actual nomination. Sure 2 guys in Norway say they did and maybe they did submit an application. But we have no way of ever knowing if Snowden was actually being considered unless he wins or it's 2064 (50 years after the award when the nomination list is unsealed). These articles are more like a jab at Obama than any real proof the guy is actually on the list.

The Nobel Prize award system is like an Olympics where you are only told who won the gold medal and never given any other details like who actually completed for the medal or even who might have won silver or bronze medals.

[DesMoinesDem]

30. He won't get it. He hasn't killed any innocent people with drones.

That's how you win a peace prize.

[aquart]

43. Pretty sure Obama won before the drones.

[DesMoinesDem]

49. 3 days after Obama became President he killed at least 14 innocent people with a drone, 4 children.

The death toll quickly increased from there. Before winning the Nobel Peace Prize Obama was already doing 'double taps' (killing the innocent people coming to help the wounded from the first drone strike), which is a war crime. He had also already targeted a funeral, killing more than 80 people. Several months later he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.

[aquart]

50. How many American soldiers were killed?

How many people were being killed in that area before the drones?

I appreciate your righteous rage, but it lacks context.

[DesMoinesDem]

52. Zero. These happened in Pakistan. Would an American soldier death make killing innocent people OK?

You think if an American soldier dies the president should kill innocent children, or dozens of innocent people attending a funeral?

[aquart]

53. Pakistan. A nuclear nation.

Are you telling me we sent drones into a NUCLEAR nation without permission? Seriously?

[DesMoinesDem]

54. Where the hell have you been over the last 6 years? Open a newspaper.

[aquart]

55. Or you could answer the question.

[DesMoinesDem]

58. I told you they happened in Pakistan. What more can I say?

If you are ignorant of the drone strikes in Pakistan than you need to do some research, and it is far greater than anything I can post. Here is a good visualization for you.

http://drones.pitchinteractive.com/

then try this

http://bit.ly/1gqYBNZ

[aquart]

59. You can say if Pakistan gave permission or not or you are wholly ignorant of a vital factor.

Whichever.

I do appreciate the deflection. I don't trust you enough to click on the links but if it's mangled bodies, that ain't anything new to my eyes.

[DesMoinesDem]

60. If you think Pakistan permission makes killing innocent people, children OK then you can look it up.

It is irrelevant to me and anyone with a conscience. I saw your straw man setup a mile away. You obviously just want to deflect from the fact that Obama kills innocent people with drones, and did so before he won his Nobel Prize.

[aquart]

62. Still avoiding the Pakistan permission thing.

If yes, why can't you say so. Your squirming is making me curious. Obama killed people, for some reason, in a nuclear ally nation. I asked if he had permission. You went...odd and twisty. It was a straightforward question. I don't pay particular attention to Pakistan.

We all have our favorite innocents we don't think should be dead. These days mine are the Palestinians and others in Syria who are under siege and being starved to death, a slow, ugly way to go.

I'm also opposed to the Rohingya being tortured, maimed, sold into slavery, mass murdered. I keep mentioning it because few others seem to think it's worth mentioning.

But you prefer dead Pakistanis. Fine. They have a government which appears not to mind them dead so it's very nice of you to pick up the slack.

Still, I do wonder why you wouldn't answer my questions.

[DesMoinesDem]

63. Why won't you argue with my strawman? Whahahahahaahah!

"So he proved me wrong that Obama didn't kill innocent people and children with drones before he won the Nobel Peace Prize. If I can just change the topic from Obama killing innocent people, to permission to kill innocent people, I can somehow win the argument!"

Sorry, I don't care to argue with you pointless strawman. It is irrelevant to me whether or not Obama has permission from a government to kill it's innocent citizens, including children. If it matters to you, you do the research. And not only am I not interested in the subject, you won't open my links if I gave them to you.

Obama kills innocent people with drones, and did so before winning the Nobel Prize. I hope your 'permission' argument helps with your cognitive dissonance.

[Ash_F]

81. The Pakistani ethnic group in power is ok with killing minorities?

You don't say? I have never heard of such a thing in any other country ever.

[truedelphi]

75. Thank you for your OP.

There was a time when if an OP like yours appeared, there would have been less gang banging of the ideas, and actual discussion.

Of course, for whatever reason, although many things like war crimes were frowned on when George the Younger s the Prez, apparently those things are A-okay if done by someone with the "D" after his name.

[hughee99]

73. Ahem, I believe the "approved" term for someone killed in a drone strike is "suspected militant".

Only the bad guys kill innocent people.

[aquart]

42. What peace has he brought?

[EX500rider]

46. Well apparently he has brought Australia and Indonesia closer to war...

......so there's that........hmmm, wait..

[Thinkingabout]

78. Now this should be one in a long line of results when an scumball steals information and does not

Know how to handle it properly. The real intent will rise, the puppet masters exposed for what the conspiracy theory entails.

[another_liberal]

47. Snowden did carve off . . .

I would say that Snowden did crave off a pretty big piece of General Alexander's lying, NSA butt.

A great many people will think that should count.

[aquart]

51. Was that the guy running a top secret spy agency?

[another_liberal]

64. Yup.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keith_B._Alexander

[RoccoR5955]

65. Maybe he'll be our next president?

Who knows, the current president has one, if Snowden gets one, that increases his chances of getting pardoned, and then running for president!

[Indi Guy]

69. K&R

Thank you Edward for your selfless devotion to our founding principles.

[pa28]

82. Any discussion of Snowden winning the prize puts pressure on the administration for amnesty.

That in itself is a good thing.