portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article global

imperialism & war

Bush and Blair Nominated for Nobel Peace Prize

This shows how fucked up the world is. Bush and Blair have been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize for the illegal, immoral, and unjust invasion of Iraq.
Bush, Blair nominated for Nobel Prize for Iraq war
09.05.2003 [20:42]

A Norwegian parliamentarian nominated U.S. President George W. Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair for the Nobel Peace Prize on Thursday, praising them for winning the war in Iraq.

"Sometimes it's necessary to use a small and effective war to prevent a much more dangerous war in the future," Jan Simonsen, a right-wing independent in Norway's parliament, told Reuters.

"If nobody acted then Saddam Hussein could have produced weapons of mass destruction and, in five or 10 years, could have used them against Israel," he said.

An award to Bush and Blair would be a U-turn after the Nobel Committee awarded the 2002 prize to former U.S. President Jimmy Carter last October. At the time, the committee chairman called it a kick in the shins to Bush's Iraq policies as Carter had been calling for a diplomatic solution.

Simonsen said the war had "made it possible to create democracy and respect for human rights in a country which for so many years has been ruled by one of the worst dictators in modern times".

However, Geir Lundestad, the director of the Nobel Institute where the five-member committee meets, said Simonsen's proposal would have to wait for the 2004 award because the deadline for nominations for 2003 passed on February 1.

The secretive five-member committee names the annual winner in mid-October. More than 160 people and organisations have been nominated for the 2003 prize, including Pope John Paul, Irish rock star Bono and Cuban dissident Oswaldo Paya.

"I'm not especially optimistic that Bush and Blair will win but I think it's worth a try," Simonsen said. He said he would encourage like-minded parliamentarians in other countries to also nominate Bush and Blair.

Nobel committees have frequently honoured the United Nations instead of unilateral action by member states. The United Nations did not give an explicit mandate for the war amid opposition from countries including France, Germany and Russia.

The 2001 Nobel Peace Prize went to the United Nations and U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan.

Thousands of people around the world, including members of national parliaments, professors of history, law and politics and former laureates can make nominations for the prize. The nomination process is secret, but people sometimes publicise their choice.
Thank God 10.May.2003 15:36


Thank God there are still some organizations that don't break their rules for Mr. Bush.

nobel peace prize is worthless 10.May.2003 17:07


Look, scumbags such as Henry Kissinger and Mother Theresa have won the Nobel Peace Prize -- so what good is it?

Get over it.

Gag me with a spoon 10.May.2003 17:25

Valley girl

While I know the actual nomination means little it still is very unpleasant to see right wing wackos calling a heinous war an act of peace. Who they going to nominate next? Ariel Sharon?

maybe they should posthumously nominate Hitler 11.May.2003 13:22


although GW may be his reincarnation, so maybe that breaks some nobel no-no, nominating the same person twice for the same thing.

huh? 11.May.2003 17:10


What's wrong with Mother Theresa? what'd she do that makes her a "scumbag?"

What's wrong with Mother Theresa? 12.May.2003 17:43


Uh, yeah ... I was kinda wondering that myself. Other than questions about her being on the fast track for sainthood (which is pretty much an internal Church affair with little practical impact on the real world), I've always understood her to be one of the white hats.

One man's view of M. Teresa 12.May.2003 19:26


Below are descriptions of a book about Mother Teresa by Christopher Hitchens. She has had critics over the years, but they haven't gained great attention because it was not a politically correct view.

What's next--The Girl Scouts: The Untold Story? How could anybody write a debunking book about Mother Teresa and her Missionaries of Charity order? Well, in this little cruise missile of a book, Hitchens quickly establishes that the idea is not without point. After all, what is Mother Teresa doing hanging out with a dictator's wife in Haiti and accepting over a million dollars from Charles Keating? The most riveting material in the book is contained in two letters: one from Mother Teresa to Judge Lance Ito--then weighing what sentence to dole out to the convicted Keating--which cited all the work Keating has done "to help the poor," and another from a Los Angeles deputy D.A., Paul Turley, back to Mother Teresa that eloquently stated that rather than working to reduce Keating's sentence, she should return the money he gave her to its rightful owners, the defrauded bond-holders. (Significantly, Mother Teresa never replied.) And why do former missionary workers and visiting doctors consistently observe that the order's medical practices seem so inadequate, especially given all the money that comes in? (Hitchens acidly observes that on the other hand, Mother Teresa herself always manages to receive world-class medical care.) Hitchens's answer is that Mother Teresa is first and foremost interested not in providing medical treatment, but in furthering Catholic doctrine and--quite literally--becoming a saint.

The New York Times Book Review, Bruno Maddox
Like all good pamphlets, The Missionary Position . . . is very short, zealously overwritten, and rails wildly in defense of an almost nonsensical proposition: that Mother Teresa of Calcutta is actually not a saint but an evil and selfish old woman. And Mr. Hitchens . . . is rather convincing. His main beef is that Teresa . . . has consorted with despots and white-collar criminals and gained millions of tax-free dollars, while the residents of her famous Calcutta clinic are still forced to confront their mortality with inadequate care. Ultimately, he argues, Mother Teresa is less interested in helping the poor than in using them as an indefatigable source of wretchedness on which to fuel the expansion of her fundamentalist Roman Catholic beliefs. Hitchens argues his case with consummate style.

Sunday Times [London]
Veteran lefty kicks old nun; old nun forgives; lefty doesn't want to be forgiven.

Book Description
Recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize, feted by politicians, the Church and the world's media, Mother Teresa of Calcutta appears to be on the fast track to sainthood. But what, asks Christopher Hitchens, makes Mother Teresa so divine? In a frank expose of the Teresa cult, Hitchens details the nature and limits of one woman's mission to the world's poor. He probes the source of the heroic status bestowed upon an Albanian nun whose only declared wish is to serve God. He asks whether Mother Teresa's good works answer any higher purpose than the need of the world's privileged to see someone, somewhere, doing something for the Third World. He unmasks pseudo-miracles, questions Mother Teresa's fitness to adjudicate on matters of sex and reproduction, and reports on a version of saintly ubiquity which affords genial relations with dictators, corrupt tycoons and convicted frauds.

In a searching examination of the Teresa cult, the author of International Territory: The United Nations 1945-95 passes his final caustic judgement on Mother Teresa, reviewing her surrogate role as propagandist for the most extreme views, and concluding that she is not heaven's agent on Earth. "Hitchens argues his case with consummate style."--New York Times. 20 illustrations.

Damn! 12.May.2003 22:09


Another of my cherished illusions bites the dust. Things have been going downhill for me ever since I got the scoop on Santa Claus. I suppose next we'll find out that Dr. Schweitzer was a drug runner and the Dali Lama is secretly donating money to Jerry Falwell.

Dalai Lama is an ex-CIA agent 13.May.2003 14:47


Read Victor Marchetti's "The CIA and the Cult of Intelligence." Can't help you on Schweitzer, though.