Quote:
Originally Posted by Hog1
I am saying this.......award has become less than it once was because of political motivations. Some of the nominating commitee would substantiate that point as they resigned in protest at the time rather than allow Arafat to recieve the award on their watch.
Do you not believe this seriously cheapens the award? Do you not think it....comical, that arguably the worlds most successful terrorist recieves the (until then) worlds greatest Peace award? It's absurd
It is similar to our own, Hollywood walk of fame that was once the memorial to greatness in the movie making. As I understand it, that has pretty much degenerated to a pay/per kind of deal with the American idol types and other wannebe trash recieving that..........distinction as well.
Like Brittany Spears!
|
I agree, the award has definitely been more politicized over the years but the overall goal of the peace prize is still noble. Still, I'm not entirely sure what you're advocating here? We get rid of the Nobel Peace Prize or that it's fixed and therefore not creditable? Perhaps you're expecting what
you deem as perfect selections to be nominated and win.
And no, I don't think Arafat winning cheapens the award for the simple fact that enough people thought he and Yitzhak Rabin aught to win.
You know, 50% of the population thinks Bush was given the presidency by the Supreme Court but that doesn't cheapen the U.S. presidency nor does it taint the election of former presidents.