What makes me think that? The nobelprize.org website. And I quote;
Nomination for the Nobel Peace Prize: Every year, the Norwegian Nobel Committee sends out thousands of letters inviting qualified people to submit their nominations for the Nobel Peace Prize. The names of the nominees and other information about the nominations cannot be revealed until 50 years later. As to why they want them concealed -- I have no idea. You'll need to take that up with them. So when you told Hollywood they were all listed at "the Nobel web site", which site were you referring to? Hollywood, You and I must have different definitions of what "back and forth discussion" is. I asked Zeb a simple, single question. I'd still like to know who was on that list he was referring to. On Oct 12, 4:58 pm, Zebnick <[email protected]> wrote: > >As far as I know, their identities are supposed to remain > > concealed for 50 years, > > What makes you think that? And why in the world would they want the > names of nominees concealed? > > On Oct 12, 12:18 pm, frankg <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Zeb, > > > Can you please provide a link to any site that lists the 2009 > > nominees? As far as I know, their identities are supposed to remain > > concealed for 50 years, so am interested in knowing how you got the > > names and their qualifications. > > > I agree that there has to be someone who has actually done something > > to promote peace in the world and is more qualified than Obama, but > > unless you can name names and qualifications it's difficult to get > > beyond conceptual disagreement. > > > On Oct 11, 11:38 pm, Zebnick <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > >Who else was nominated and why do you think they were more worthy > > > > Go to the Nobel web site, lazy ass. They're all listed there. Why > > > they're more qualified should be obvious, even to you. > > > > On Oct 9, 6:31 pm, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Zeb, > > > > > Who else was nominated and why do you think they were more worthy of > > > > the award? But, then again, it really doesnt matter as you are not on > > > > the committee. Tough break. > > > > > On Oct 9, 1:21 pm, Zebnick <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > All of the reasons you cited are horse shit. The Nobel Committee > > > > > nominated Obama for this prize 10 days after his inauguration when he > > > > > had done even less than he has done to date. In fact he had done > > > > > NOTHING at that point. This prize is an embarrassment because it was > > > > > given by a bunch of hysterical Bush hating libroids in Norway to the > > > > > detriment of all those who were nominated and truly deserving. It is > > > > > sad to see people entrusted with with the prestige of the Nobel > > > > > destroying its credibility for their own political obsessions. > > > > > > On Oct 9, 11:22 am, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > frankg, > > > > > > > It's a simple matter of personal opinion as to whether or not money/ > > > > > > time was wasted in the President's attempt to help the U.S. get the > > > > > > Olympics. I made no reference to people that expressed a difference > > > > > > of > > > > > > opinion in a sane manner. I mentioned only the nut-jobs. Any "slap > > > > > > on > > > > > > the face" of the U.S was removed by the honor of a Noble Prize to a > > > > > > sitting U.S. President. > > > > > > > The AP article made the reasons for the award quite clear. > > > > > > 1. The Presidents initiatives to reduce nuclear weapons. > > > > > > 2. His efforts to ease dangerous tensions with the Muslim world. > > > > > > 3. His stress of diplomacy & cooperation rather than unilateralism > > > > > > 4. He's been in office 9 months and has managed not to start a > > > > > > single > > > > > > war (OK, I added that one myself). > > > > > > > Actually I personally do not consider his award as significant as > > > > > > Jimmy Carter's. After all the peace accord he brokered between Egypt > > > > > > and Israel is STILL holding. Still, to be dismissive of the AWARD > > > > > > itself just because it was awarded to someone you don't like is > > > > > > silly. > > > > > > > On Oct 9, 9:52 am, frankg <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Hollywood, > > > > > > > > I'm not following the point you're trying to make. > > > > > > > > A week ago people were complaining that Obama was wasting > > > > > > > time/money > > > > > > > traveling to Denmark to make a push for the Olympics. They also > > > > > > > felt > > > > > > > that it was an even greater slap in the face of Chicago/US that > > > > > > > Obama > > > > > > > would make a personal plea and then get cut so early in the > > > > > > > voting. So > > > > > > > people questioned his motive, the waste of time & money, and the > > > > > > > impact his being snubbed would have on him and the US. > > > > > > > > How does this in any way relate to people now objecting that > > > > > > > Obama be > > > > > > > awarded a Nobel Peace Prize (a prize, btw, that is typically > > > > > > > awarded > > > > > > > to people who have actually achieved something) when he's not yet > > > > > > > accomplished a thing? > > > > > > > > I just don't get the connection between the two events... > > > > > > > > On Oct 9, 10:23 am, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Zeb, > > > > > > > > > Wait a minute there lad. Less than a week ago the world was > > > > > > > > practically coming to an end because the U.S. did not get the > > > > > > > > Olympics > > > > > > > > and it was all the "fault" of President Obama. > > > > > > > > Didn't you read the comments here? The WORLD was using the > > > > > > > > President > > > > > > > > as "a urinal", it was damaging to OUR prestige, one dumbass even > > > > > > > > suggested it just might be the "last straw" of indignities > > > > > > > > heaped upon > > > > > > > > our nation and their might be a military coup because of it. > > > > > > > > > BUT NOW the freakin' NOBEL PEACE PRIZE is trivial & > > > > > > > > unimportant????? > > > > > > > > WTF? LMFAO!! > > > > > > > > > On Oct 9, 8:43 am, Zebnick <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Noting that the 4-H Club Blue Ribbon has really gained no > > > > > > > > > additional > > > > > > > > > luster over the decades, the International Committee on Prize > > > > > > > > > Prestige > > > > > > > > > added that it has lost no luster either. The flagging Nobel, > > > > > > > > > on the > > > > > > > > > other hand, began a steep descent when an apparently > > > > > > > > > hysterical > > > > > > > > > committee awarded the Peace Nobel to an unrepentant terrorist > > > > > > > > > and an > > > > > > > > > ineffectual ex-President Peanut decades ago. Subsequently, > > > > > > > > > Nobel > > > > > > > > > "Peace" prizes have been awarded to people for making > > > > > > > > > inaccurate > > > > > > > > > movies about the weather and now for being a man with black > > > > > > > > > skin. > > > > > > > > > Representatives from the 4-H Club, nonetheless, are > > > > > > > > > celebrating their > > > > > > > > > assent in prestige and are said to be considering a Blue > > > > > > > > > Ribbon for > > > > > > > > > "Peace" themselves.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
