Skip to comments.Gore's prize: A fraud on the people
Posted on 10/13/2007 11:38:13 PM PDT by upchuck
Five Norwegians gave a prize to Al Gore, and all the world is supposed to heed his counsel henceforth. No, thanks.
Alfred Nobel felt horrible about the uses to which his invention -- dynamite -- was put. So he endowed the Nobel Peace Prize and instructed that it go "to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between the nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses."
Al Gore has done exactly none of those things.
Gore, however, did write a book and make a film about global warming. He has become the second environmental activist to win the peace prize in the past four years. Wangari Muta Maathai won it in 2004 for planting trees.
Thus we have indisputable confirmation that the Nobel Peace Prize is no longer a serious international award. In 1994 the five Norwegian politicians who award the prize gave it to the murdering thug Yasser Arafat. Two years before that they gave it to literary fraud Rigoberta Menchu, whose autobiography was largely fabricated. (An example: The brother she supposedly watched die of malnutrition was later found by a New York Times reporter to be very much alive and well.)
On Friday the prize was given to Al Gore and the International Panel on Climate Change. Two days before, a British judge ruled that Gore's film, "An Inconvenient Truth," contained so many errors (read: lies) that it could be shown in British public schools only if accompanied by a fact sheet correcting the errors.
The Nobel Peace Prize is worse than a joke. It's a fraud. It is such a transparent fraud that the five Norwegian politicians who award it have been reduced to defending their decision by concocting elaborate rationalizations. This year they laughably claimed that Gore deserves the prize because, well, global climate change" may induce large-scale migration and lead to greater competition for the Earth's resources," and "there may be increased danger of violent conflicts and wars." (Emphasis ours.)
And Islamic terrorists may give up jihad and sing Kumbaya after listening to old Cat Stevens records. But that's no basis for distributing the world's formerly most prestigious prize.
If winning this useless medal prompts Al Gore to get into the presidential race, which we doubt, the irony will be that the American people will turn a more skeptical eye to His Smugness than the Nobel committee did.
The American public won't accept at face value Gore's self-righteous proclamations or his self-serving predictions of looming global catastrophy. And Gore has to know that, which is why he will almost certainly stick to the world of make-believe -- Hollywood and International Do-Goodery -- where he can pretend to be the great sage and savior he wishes he really were and left-wing Europeans and thespians try to convince us he is.
10 years ago, if I had bumped into someone who told me they were awarded a Nobel, I would have been in awe. Today...I’d tell them to watch where they’re going.
Great article. Couldn’t have said any of this any better myself. If this helps propel Gore into the White House, I’ve lost all hope in the American public.
even if global warming was real, he didn’t come up with any idea that would actually solve the problem
The sad truth is....Burma Monks have earned the Nobel Peace Prize (should have).....by dying for peace. This is what makes the five individuals on the Nobel Peace Prize committee look so foolish.
I think the greatest way to “even” the situation...as they have this grand speech episode in Oslo in the coming weeks....get one of the Burma monks...dressed in red robe...to sit in the front of the audience. Let the cameras roll and catch this fine picture of a dimwit at the podium and a monk facing him.
But prepare yourself...the 2008 winner....which you can already feel and appreciate....is Bill Clinton. This is the way that the Swedish socialists can influence the US election. So you add up last year’s dummy (Carter), this year’s dummy (Gore), and you crown your achievements with Bill Clinton next year.
Says a lot for a “intelligent” bunch of Swedes.
In 1960 there were 5,000 polar bears. Today there are over 25,000.
Terrorist Yassar Arafat had one, worse than worthless slug Jimmy Carter got one, yep, Gore is in good company.
But I'm sure she really meant it. I mean yeah, it was fake -- but I'm sure it was really an accurate portrayal of how it might have happened.
And yes, I had concluded that the Nobel Prize is now a joke. But maybe I'm wrong. Maybe it is, as this author contends, worse than a joke.
It’s now the “Liberal of the Year” award.
Norway, not Sweden.
In fairness, the Nobels in Physics, Chemistry and Medicine have not been degraded. (First person to notice what those awards have that the Nobel Peace Prize doesn’t wins a kewpie doll.)
He is a fraud who is making untold amounts of money off people.
A substantial amount of prize money.
Nope. IIRC, the rewards for the other Nobels are less than that for the NPP.
The technical Nobel prizes are probably awarded by juries of experts in the field in which those prizes are given. Logic would suggest only experts would understand the superlative scientific contributions of other experts.
Oops, we must be fair to the Gore.
He certainly has a vision of carbon offsets by which more productive nations (read United States) transfer a portion of their wealth to less productive nations.
How about a Central Carbon Commissariat (headed by the Gore, of course) which doles out carboniferous fuel allocations to the several nations, thereby making all equal. From each according to its ability, to each according to its needs.
In addition, how about a "Carbon Tax" (alternatively, "BTU Tax") whereby it will cost so much to use petroleum, natural gas or coal as a fuel that we will all be reduced to riding bicycles.
OK, come to think of it, all these things are likely to put a major strain on relations between nations.
So, Nobel Peace Prize? It is to laugh.
Second, you have to show that recent changes (as opposed to all the changes of the past) are due to burning of fossil fuels; not the hundred or so other factors that are simultaneously taking place.
Third, you have to prove that the man made changes will be harmful. Then, and only then can you come to the point:
MAY induce large-scale migration and lead to greater competition for the Earth's resources," and "there may be increased danger of violent conflicts and wars.
Why not give the prize to my third grader. He MAY grow up and be the bringer of Whirled Peas.
POLL: DOES AL GORE DESERVE THE NOBEL PEACE PRIZE?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.