EPTSnowden is not gonna get the prize. Duh.
Does Snowden deserve the Nobel Peace Prize? - Page 3
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Conti
Germany2516 Posts
Snowden is not gonna get the prize. Duh. | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On July 16 2013 00:55 Conti wrote: And I bet that the NSA director is going to be nominated, too. With all the terrorism the NSA prevented and deterred, I'd say he's done more for peace than Snowden. | ||
|
Conti
Germany2516 Posts
On July 16 2013 00:57 LegalLord wrote: With all the terrorism the NSA prevented and deterred, I'd say he's done more for peace than Snowden. Probably. So did my grandmother, though! She prevented 10 terrorist attacks! But she can't tell you how. The details are top secret. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On July 16 2013 00:57 LegalLord wrote: With all the terrorism the NSA prevented and deterred, I'd say he's done more for peace than Snowden. I can't say I agree with the nomination, though I get that people are objecting to the secret programs where countries collect data. If they were public programs and the governments just said "look the internet is huge and sometimes we need to back and review something as it was at the time , so we have these data bases for that," people might be less upset. | ||
|
monkh
United Kingdom568 Posts
Initially I would say no because the information doesn't (in short term) create peace it would only further encourage nations to do more cyber warfare. If the information released about the NSA actually helped stop this kind of stuff happening (which I don't think it did, it only escalated it) I think he might of deserved the nobel peace prize. Although it seems like nobel peace prize is more about intentions than actual actions and what came of it. On July 16 2013 00:55 Conti wrote: The nomination is absolutely pointless. Countless people can nominate anyone. And they do: Assange was nominated in the past. Bradley Manning was nominated. Practically every US president ever was nominated. And so was Stalin. And I bet that the NSA director is going to be nominated, too. Snowden is not gonna get the prize. Duh. I think Hitler also nominated | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On July 16 2013 01:00 Plansix wrote: I can't say I agree with the nomination, though I get that people are objecting to the secret programs where countries collect data. If they were public programs and the governments just said "look the internet is huge and sometimes we need to back and review something as it was at the time , so we have these data bases for that," people might be less upset. I personally think that NSA-obtained data simply shouldn't be admissible as evidence for any crime other than those that it seeks to prevent. That would ease a lot of the important concerns. | ||
|
LaaLaaLeevi
200 Posts
On July 16 2013 01:00 monkh wrote: I think Hitler also nominated Yes, Swedes recommended the prize for Hitler, dont remember the year thought... | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On July 16 2013 01:09 LegalLord wrote: I personally think that NSA-obtained data simply shouldn't be admissible as evidence for any crime other than those that it seeks to prevent. That would ease a lot of the important concerns. The problem with that is that any further evidence gained is not admissible as well, if it is obtained due to the non-admissible evidence(fruit from the poison tree rule). It is a huge problem with the internet and evidence(in a long string of huge problems with the internet and evidence) that needs to be dealt with. But making the nature and ways the database works public would go a long way to changing opinion on it. And the poster above is correct that Hitler also was nominated for the peace prize. Oh how we forget. | ||
|
sc2superfan101
3583 Posts
Does he deserve it more than Obama did? Sure, but that's a pretty low standard. And now the million dollar question: Do I care either way? Absolutely not. The Nobel Peace Prize is a joke anyway. | ||
|
Conti
Germany2516 Posts
On July 16 2013 01:13 Plansix wrote: And the poster above is correct that Hitler also was nominated for the peace prize. Oh how we forget. Though the Hitler nomination was actually an ironic nomination, as far as I know. Still, it was a legitimate nomination, and it was ignored like all the other nominations that always get published widely. | ||
|
zeo
Serbia6262 Posts
| ||
|
Kinon
Romania207 Posts
| ||
|
Kinon
Romania207 Posts
On July 16 2013 01:00 Conti wrote: Probably. So did my grandmother, though! She prevented 10 terrorist attacks! But she can't tell you how. The details are top secret. An ordinary grandmother during the day. The terrorists worst nightmare during the night! | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On July 16 2013 01:16 Conti wrote: Though the Hitler nomination was actually an ironic nomination, as far as I know. Still, it was a legitimate nomination, and it was ignored like all the other nominations that always get published widely. I don't think they had hipster level ironic humor in 1939, but I can't remember the exact reason why he was nominated. But it should be pointed out that until Snowden wins, people should just ignore the nomination process. | ||
|
Conti
Germany2516 Posts
On July 16 2013 01:22 Plansix wrote: I don't think they had hipster level ironic humor in 1939, but I can't remember the exact reason why he was nominated. But it should be pointed out that until Snowden wins, people should just ignore the nomination process. From the official website: Adolf Hitler was nominated once in 1939. Incredulous though it may seem today, the Nazi dictator Adolf Hitler was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize in 1939, by a member of the Swedish parliament, an E.G.C. Brandt. Apparently though, Brandt never intended the nomination to be taken seriously. Brandt was to all intents and purposes a dedicated antifascist, and had intended this nomination more as a satiric criticism of the current political debate in Sweden. ( At the time, a number of Swedish parliamentarians had nominated then British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlin for the Nobel Peace Prize, a nomination which Brandt viewed with great skepticism. ) However, Brandt's satirical intentions were not well received at all and the nomination was swiftly withdrawn in a letter dated 1 February 1939. And I absolutely agree with the Snowden part. | ||
|
Holy_AT
Austria978 Posts
Damn I meant the government of the USA. And they should deprive obama of the nobel peace price. In my eyes it is evil to spy on allied governments, on its own people and the people of allied governments. The government should secure its people freedoms not take them away one by one. Obamas change ... yeah and what a change it was. "The more things change, the more they stay the same" is a saying. Well applied to Obama, things must have change so horrendously much that they stayed exactly the same or got way worse. With the internet data, you can make educated guesses on ones religion, political alignment, sexual interests and alignment and what not. Its just crazy not even the soviet union was that efficient, gods damn it, maybe we slaughtered the wrong pig oO. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On July 16 2013 01:27 Conti wrote: From the official website: And I absolutely agree with the Snowden part. All right then, I was not aware they issued nominations for "satiric criticism", though I don't think they make a habit of it. All the more reason to ignore this until they issue the prize. | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On July 16 2013 01:13 Plansix wrote: The problem with that is that any further evidence gained is not admissible as well, if it is obtained due to the non-admissible evidence(fruit from the poison tree rule). It is a huge problem with the internet and evidence(in a long string of huge problems with the internet and evidence) that needs to be dealt with. But making the nature and ways the database works public would go a long way to changing opinion on it. Nevertheless, I think it's a better solution than either crippling the NSA's ability to prevent domestic threats or allowing them to unfairly prosecute for crimes they shouldn't be able to know about. It's a legal mess, yes, but so is everything important enough to matter. | ||
|
Poffel
471 Posts
On July 15 2013 23:22 jello_biafra wrote: If Obama was awarded it I don't see any reason why Snowden shouldn't get it too, I doubt he would be able to attend the ceremony but it would be funny to see Obama's reaction. Maybe the committee should convince Obama to pass down his prize to Snowden. Otherwise, it might look a little dumb in the history books: 2009: Nobel Peace Prize for the regime leader 2013: Nobel Peace Prize for the regime opponent | ||
|
FluffyBinLaden
United States527 Posts
On July 16 2013 01:00 Plansix wrote: I can't say I agree with the nomination, though I get that people are objecting to the secret programs where countries collect data. If they were public programs and the governments just said "look the internet is huge and sometimes we need to back and review something as it was at the time , so we have these data bases for that," people might be less upset. The difference is that you're talking about looking at the public internet. These guys aren't just looking at the public internet, they're looking at very private things, too. And because I wish the Peace Prize had higher standards, I'd have to say no to Snowden, although the does deserve to be commended. EDIT: Hit Post too early >.< | ||
| ||
