Skip to comments.
Jimmy Carter awarded Nobel Peace Prize
http://www.nobel.se ^
Posted on 10/11/2002 2:03:14 AM PDT by HAL9000
"for his decades of untiring effort to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts, to advance democracy and human rights, and to promote economic and social development"
TOPICS: Breaking News; Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120 ... 181-195 next last
To: HAL9000
Jimmy Carter awarded Nobel Peace Prize!It would have been more believable if this had been a joint award to include none other than that great and noble moralist and sub-human, super clean scumbag, Bill Clinton.
Then a Robert Paulson2 tripple "puke" would have been in order.
Here it is anyway!!
PUKETY PUKETY PUKE!
81
posted on
10/11/2002 5:26:42 AM PDT
by
VOYAGER
To: mombonn
"I used to agree with you that he's a good man. I don't believe that any more. He is just as evil as clintbilly. "
I agree. I also use to think he was a good man. That was part of the image he tried to make us believe. After I found that he didn't recognize Israel as a country, but instead he recognized Palistan as the country where Israel is.
82
posted on
10/11/2002 5:27:46 AM PDT
by
auggy
To: HAL9000
Oh, just great! And just what to expect. Let's remember that after all, the prize was instituted by Alfred Nobel who gave the world more explosive.. err.. explosives ;),
A couple of candidates for the next round (if there is one), in the great old Nobel tradition:
83
posted on
10/11/2002 5:30:37 AM PDT
by
Cachelot
To: Robert_Paulson2
with peanuts on top...
"I know where I can find some peanuts!"
-SpongeBob Squarepants.
-Eric
84
posted on
10/11/2002 5:31:09 AM PDT
by
E Rocc
To: Cincinatus' Wife
And he's wrong.
Peace through strength - and the will to get down-and-dirty. I hope CIA is making contingency plans if that Lula character wins in Brazil...
85
posted on
10/11/2002 5:34:33 AM PDT
by
hchutch
To: HAL9000
Perfectly timed, too, to be a slap at GWB as well. I worked in the campaign and voted for Jimmy in the old days, and was highly disappointed in him, to say the least.
To: HAL9000
Carter does deserve some recognition for his role in the Camp David Accords - although it was Begin and Sadat who rightly deserve most of the credit. But most people have forgotten it was actually Walter Cronkite who got Begin and Sadat together in the first place. He's probably disgruntled about that.
Actually there's a historical rumor that it was Begin's initiative. Mossad had the goods on a Libyan sponsored plot to assasinate Sadat. Normal procedure was to have Mossad turn over the info to the CIA, who would pass it to the Egyptians. Begin instead had the head of Mossad meet with the head of the Egyptian
Muhkbarat in Morrocco, who handed over the package. The plot was rolled up, Sadat knew that Begin was willing to talk, the US was the obvious choice as moderator, and the rest was history.
-Eric
87
posted on
10/11/2002 5:35:47 AM PDT
by
E Rocc
To: All
Carter wanted, he really really wanted, to make the world a better place. (Even if he had "lust" in his heart). That is what counts for the liberals.
Of course, if one looked at actual results, then Reagan should have been awarded this prize. A visionary, he was more responsible than any other single person for defeating one of the two great evils of the last century.
A hundred years from now, Reagan will be as remembered as Lincoln is today. Carter will be "remembered" as the twentieth century equivalent of Martin van Buren.
To: BruceS
My thoughts exactly, Bruce -- the timing is just too coincidental.
I wonder why thay had to go back to the "golden oldies" to select a winner this year? I mean, there must have been some well-known Muslim mullah or cleric who worked for peace and understanding over the past year .... < /s >
Seriously in this vein, Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan would actually have been a more palatable choice.
89
posted on
10/11/2002 5:39:56 AM PDT
by
mikrofon
To: eastforker
Say what you will,he did not have leadership qualities,but he is humane and a good man. Hardly.
A "good man" would never support the horrors of abortion, as the "honorable" Mr. Carter has and does.
90
posted on
10/11/2002 5:47:43 AM PDT
by
A2J
To: TheConservator
Of course, if one looked at actual results, then Reagan should have been awarded this prize. A visionary, he was more responsible than any other single person for defeating one of the two great evils of the last century.
They're stretching these days to find winners. Last year it was the UN (again). But the Prize has pretty much made itself a joke by failing to recognize that sometimes standing up to evil does more to advance the human condition and even peace itself that simply working towards a narrow defintion of "peace".
Winners include:
Yasser Arafat (1994)
Frederik De Klerk and Nelson Mandela (1993)
Rigoberta Menchu (1992), later found to be a fabricator.
Mikhail Gorbachev (1990)
Henry Kissinger and Le Duc Tho (1973)
Albert Lutuli (1960)
Non-winners include:
Franklin Deleano Roosevelt
Winston Churchill
Ronald Reagan - indeed Gorbachev got it for accepting a defeat that Reagan engineered.
Margaret Thatcher
Pope John Paul II
-Eric
91
posted on
10/11/2002 5:53:47 AM PDT
by
E Rocc
To: HAL9000
Think about how fit to be tied ole slick willie is upon hearing this news. Supposedly Carter got the prize for his efforts in the middle east.
About the only thing slick willie paid any attention to, other than Monica, was the middle east.
Now he spends all his time wandering through Africa and India pretending to do good works.......
How delicious the irony!!!!
To: nopardons; eastforker
Are you certain that you belong of FR ?Hey, nopardons, JimRob has not banned dissent around here yet, so back off!!!
I don't agree with eastforker about the overall great American thing, but Carter is strides ahead of today's democratic slime like McDermott and Daschle.
To: eastforker
Carter goes around the world bashing America and Bush. He can't keep his damn mouth shut over foreign policy even though his Presidency and his decisions were a disaster. He was given this prize by the Commies and Socialists of the world to stick a finger in Bush's eye and point out what a mean spirited man Bush is.
94
posted on
10/11/2002 5:57:58 AM PDT
by
NewsGal
To: HAL9000
Your comments sound about right. Anwar Sadat deserves a LOT of credit. Too bad islamofascism won the day over there. In Ronald Reagan's autobiography, he gives Carter a lot of credit for the Camp David accords.
95
posted on
10/11/2002 6:01:34 AM PDT
by
Huck
To: eastforker
I've always said Carter was too good of a man to be President. I feel he didn't fully understand how the system worked. He is a good man, misguided sometimes I'll admit, but he was not a good President
To: HAL9000
Where is the BARF ALERT, Hal?
97
posted on
10/11/2002 6:03:54 AM PDT
by
Heff
To: Robert_Paulson2
I know of another thing that can include peanuts or corn that best describes the qualifications of this prize.
98
posted on
10/11/2002 6:06:40 AM PDT
by
Bogey78O
To: NewsGal
The prize is not what really annoying. What is really anoying is the 1 million us dollars that goes with it. Is he going to donate the 1 million ALL to habitat for humanity?
To: eastforker
The trouble is he's morally incoherent. He'll pray to God every day but then he'll stand side by side by those who hate God and then praise them.
He suffers the same disease all socialist Christians suffer. Moral Incoherence.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120 ... 181-195 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson