Why is it that we still don't know who nominated Him?

[Si modo]

Well having thought about this for 1 minute he was nominated on the presumption that countries would prosper through programs such as food for oil in Iraq. The real reason countries hated Bush over Iraq was he brought an end to the oil revenue of nations throughout the world via the United Nations dirty dealings. It is very simple they want a return to where they can scam some type of monetary value from this presidency. A return of a democrat to the white house is sought after because of this. Europe could not give a hoot about Iraq it was a means to get oil for $5-$10 a barrel. So as who nominated him hmmm any member of the UN, Russia, China, France, Spain, Germany, the list goes on and on, on whoever made money. And with the rhetoric of his Campaign that was a showin for this nomination.

Just follow the money, Eurupe would have been pissed at us as well if we had droped Northern and Southern Watch and left Iraqi borders in 2003. If there is money to be made believe me these people will come out of the wood work.

I don't think you think at all. Oil for food? That was under Saddam. WTF are you talking about? Do YOU even know?

"Such as" - although sm-all words, they have big meaning.

 

[Polk]

Why would there be transparency, exactly...this isn't something the US government decides.

I've lost count of how many comments I've read about how meaningless this award is...obviously not to many of the wingers...it's all they can talk about.

Because there usually is transparency. Most who make nominations have no issues with letting others know they have.

No, there isn't "usually transparency". It's already been shown that the records are sealed for 50 years. That some people choose to broadcast their nominations doesn't change that.

 

[Si modo]

The more I see of the names and deeds of other nominees, the more I understand why the nominator has yet to come forward.

Chinese dissidents, Cordoba for releasing hostages of Colombian rebels, humanitarian Mortenson, etc.

I understand the low profile.

 

[woodjack]

Well having thought about this for 1 minute he was nominated on the presumption that countries would prosper through programs such as food for oil in Iraq. The real reason countries hated Bush over Iraq was he brought an end to the oil revenue of nations throughout the world via the United Nations dirty dealings. It is very simple they want a return to where they can scam some type of monetary value from this presidency. A return of a democrat to the white house is sought after because of this. Europe could not give a hoot about Iraq it was a means to get oil for $5-$10 a barrel. So as who nominated him hmmm any member of the UN, Russia, China, France, Spain, Germany, the list goes on and on, on whoever made money. And with the rhetoric of his Campaign that was a showin for this nomination.

Just follow the money, Eurupe would have been pissed at us as well if we had droped Northern and Southern Watch and left Iraqi borders in 2003. If there is money to be made believe me these people will come out of the wood work.

I don't think you think at all. Oil for food? That was under Saddam. WTF are you talking about? Do YOU even know?

Yes I realize that was under Saddam written by Clinton and the UN, Europe hated Bush because he brought an end to it not because they do not want war, the hatred for Bush is very prevalant over there, and since the nomination of Obama was 1 Feb for the NPP the only thing they could have even nominated him on is the presumption that he would bring monentary gains to them in the future based on the rhetoric of his campaign since he did nothing for it in 12 days and was based souly on that. The reason is simple they hated Bush that much. My point is they gave him the award on presumption not because of anything he did.

 

[Sweet Willy]

Nonsense.

Pay attention.

Title of thread: Why is it that we still don't know who nominated Him?


Answer: The Nobel prize committee has not said. They do not have to.


End of story.

Are you a moron? No seriously, are you?

Even an imbecile can read. But, for those less gifted than imbeciles, let's put your nonsense strawmen to bed:

The Nobel Committee does not have to say anything (note that tidbit is included in my OP: "... this is either sheer guesswork or information put out by the person or persons behind the nomination. Information in the Nobel Committee's nominations data base is not made public until after fifty years.").


Now that I've repeated the OP to you, we can hope that your nonsense strawmen will stop.




For other Nobel prizes, the nominators are transparent.

For past Peace Prizes, the nominators are transparent. This one is not.

Why don't we know?

Because they don't have to tell us.

Give it a rest.

 

[Ravi]

I heard that the Republicans in the House of Representatives are going to introduce a bill that would force Obama to reveal who nominated him.

 

[Si modo]

....

Because they don't have to tell us.

....

Only morons continue with strawmen.



You show off, you.

 

[rdean]

Here are those eligible to nominate for a Peace Prize:

Who may submit nominations?

Each year between 150 and 200 different nominations are received of candidates for the Nobel Peace Prize. The number has risen steadily as the Prize has become increasingly globalized. There may occasionally be several thousand nominators behind one and the same nominee.

Who, then, may nominate candidates for the Peace Prize?

According to the statutes of the Nobel Foundation, a nomination is considered valid if it is submitted by a person who falls within one of the following categories:
#

Members of national assemblies and governments, and members of the Inter-Parliamentary Union
#

Members of the Permanent Court of Arbitration at the Hague and of the International Court of Justice at the Hague
#

Members of Institut de Droit International
#

University professors of history, political science, philosophy, law and theology, and university presidents and directors of peace research institutes and institutes of international affairs
#

Former Nobel Peace Prize Laureates and board members of institutions that have previously been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize
#

Present and past members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee
#

Former permanent advisers to the Norwegian Nobel Institute

ON

The Nobel Committee makes its selection on the basis of nominations received or postmarked no later than February 1 of the year in question. Nominations which do not meet the deadline are nor***ly included in the following year's assessment. Members of the Nobel Committee are entitled to submit their own nominations as late as at the first meeting of the Committee after the expiry of the deadline.

The Committee does not itself announce the names of nominees. In so far as certain names crop up in the advance speculations as to who will receive the year's Prize, this is either sheer guesswork or information put out by the person or persons behind the nomination. Information in the Nobel Committee's nominations data base is not made public until after fifty years.​

Who may submit nominations? | Nobels fredspris

Who nominated Obama? I don't recall ever immediately not knowing the names of who nominated others.

Who cares? It's the voting that counts.

I remember when some on the right were insisting the John Kerry submitted himself before he recieved his medals. Next they will be saying Obama nominated himself.

http://img59.exs.cx/img59/2828/george_bush_uniform.jpg

The only time you can wear medals you didn't earn is when you break the law.

This is like Acorn. Everyone can be nominated. But there can be only one winner. It's the voting that counts.

 

[Si modo]

Here are those eligible to nominate for a Peace Prize:

Who may submit nominations?

Each year between 150 and 200 different nominations are received of candidates for the Nobel Peace Prize. The number has risen steadily as the Prize has become increasingly globalized. There may occasionally be several thousand nominators behind one and the same nominee.

Who, then, may nominate candidates for the Peace Prize?

According to the statutes of the Nobel Foundation, a nomination is considered valid if it is submitted by a person who falls within one of the following categories:
#

Members of national assemblies and governments, and members of the Inter-Parliamentary Union
#

Members of the Permanent Court of Arbitration at the Hague and of the International Court of Justice at the Hague
#

Members of Institut de Droit International
#

University professors of history, political science, philosophy, law and theology, and university presidents and directors of peace research institutes and institutes of international affairs
#

Former Nobel Peace Prize Laureates and board members of institutions that have previously been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize
#

Present and past members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee
#

Former permanent advisers to the Norwegian Nobel Institute

ON

The Nobel Committee makes its selection on the basis of nominations received or postmarked no later than February 1 of the year in question. Nominations which do not meet the deadline are nor***ly included in the following year's assessment. Members of the Nobel Committee are entitled to submit their own nominations as late as at the first meeting of the Committee after the expiry of the deadline.

The Committee does not itself announce the names of nominees. In so far as certain names crop up in the advance speculations as to who will receive the year's Prize, this is either sheer guesswork or information put out by the person or persons behind the nomination. Information in the Nobel Committee's nominations data base is not made public until after fifty years.​

Who may submit nominations? | Nobels fredspris

Who nominated Obama? I don't recall ever immediately not knowing the names of who nominated others.

Who cares? It's the voting that counts.

I remember when some on the right were insisting the John Kerry submitted himself before he recieved his medals. Next they will be saying Obama nominated himself.

http://img59.exs.cx/img59/2828/george_bush_uniform.jpg

The only time you can wear medals you didn't earn is when you break the law.

This is like Acorn. Everyone can be nominated. But there can be only one winner. It's the voting that counts.

I care. I want to know who actually believed that BHO could compete with the likes of Chinese dissidents, humanitarian Mortgenson, Cordoba's negotiations to release hostages, etc.

But, I can also understand their embarrassment.

 

[veritas]

Well having thought about this for 1 minute he was nominated on the presumption that countries would prosper through programs such as food for oil in Iraq. The real reason countries hated Bush over Iraq was he brought an end to the oil revenue of nations throughout the world via the United Nations dirty dealings. It is very simple they want a return to where they can scam some type of monetary value from this presidency. A return of a democrat to the white house is sought after because of this. Europe could not give a hoot about Iraq it was a means to get oil for $5-$10 a barrel. So as who nominated him hmmm any member of the UN, Russia, China, France, Spain, Germany, the list goes on and on, on whoever made money. And with the rhetoric of his Campaign that was a showin for this nomination.

Just follow the money, Eurupe would have been pissed at us as well if we had droped Northern and Southern Watch and left Iraqi borders in 2003. If there is money to be made believe me these people will come out of the wood work.

I don't think you think at all. Oil for food? That was under Saddam. WTF are you talking about? Do YOU even know?

Yes I realize that was under Saddam written by Clinton and the UN, Europe hated Bush because he brought an end to it not because they do not want war, the hatred for Bush is very prevalant over there, and since the nomination of Obama was 1 Feb for the NPP the only thing they could have even nominated him on is the presumption that he would bring monentary gains to them in the future based on the rhetoric of his campaign since he did nothing for it in 12 days and was based souly on that. The reason is simple they hated Bush that much. My point is they gave him the award on presumption not because of anything he did.

Obama was a very vocal and prominent Senator before he ran for President. He was against going into Iraq as a state senator and did a lot of traveling before he took the oath of office. The fact that he is now referred to as President Obama places no limits as to how far back or for what he may have done to get notice of a nominator. He also took the unprecedented step of having an infrastructure in place while he was campaigning to look at all issues, and transition things before he won the election. The "12 days" thing is a non starter. He made the Berlin speech in May 2008. It was very well received. His Senate stint was very successful, he was on the Foreign Relations committee and did a lot of work there. You should look it up.

 

[Sweet Willy]

....

Because they don't have to tell us.

....

Only morons continue with strawmen.



You show off, you.

Uh.....only morons continue to make up shit when the answer is right in front of your face.

They haven't told us. They don't have to.

The rest of your crap is........crap.

 

[Si modo]

....

Because they don't have to tell us.

....

Only morons continue with strawmen.



You show off, you.

Uh.....only morons continue to make up shit when the answer is right in front of your face.

They haven't told us. They don't have to.

The rest of your crap is........crap.

Third time dealing with your strawman. No shit they don't have to tell us.

Now, that your nonsense is once again dealt with, do you have a point?

Or are you just a nonsense troll who argues for no logical reason?

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

Obama was a very vocal and prominent Senator before he ran for President. He was against going into Iraq as a state senator and did a lot of traveling before he took the oath of office. The fact that he is now referred to as President Obama places no limits as to how far back or for what he may have done to get notice of a nominator. He also took the unprecedented step of having an infrastructure in place while he was campaigning to look at all issues, and transition things before he won the election. The "12 days" thing is a non starter. He made the Berlin speech in May 2008. It was very well received. His Senate stint was very successful, he was on the Foreign Relations committee and did a lot of work there. You should look it up.

Yeah he was vocal here is one of the things he said

, "...When you rush these budgets that are a foot high and nobody has any idea what's in them and nobody has read them. And it gets rushed through without any clear deliberation or debate then these kinds of things happen. And I think that this is in some ways what happened to the Patriot Act. I mean you remember that there was no real debate about that. It was so quick after 9/11 that it was introduced that people felt very intimidated by the administration."

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Would you guys stop your whining, be happy your president won. I read someone say that this was a reward to America too for finally we have elected a decent good person. The world has changed since Reagan began the slide to militant idiocy. Time for you tools to grow up.


Paul's take on you.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/05/opinion/05krugman.html

If the prize meant something at this point, I would be happy. It doesn't.

For those who can focus on a question, still I'm wondering who made the nomination and why they have issues with the public knowing this.

From the Nobel website (which you linked to before, I don't know why you missed this part)

Has X been nominated as a candidate for the Nobel Prize, or where do I find a list of Nobel Prize nominees?

According to the Statutes of the Nobel Foundation, information about the nominations is not to be disclosed, publicly or privately, for a period of fifty years. The restriction not only concerns the nominees and nominators, but also investigations and opinions in the awarding of a prize. Nomination information older than fifty years is public. At this web site the Nomination Databases for the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine, 1901-1951 and for the Nobel Peace Prize, 1901-1955 are now available. Nomination Databases for the other prize categories will follow.

Frequently Asked Questions

 

[Ravi]

Would you guys stop your whining, be happy your president won. I read someone say that this was a reward to America too for finally we have elected a decent good person. The world has changed since Reagan began the slide to militant idiocy. Time for you tools to grow up.


Paul's take on you.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/05/opinion/05krugman.html

If the prize meant something at this point, I would be happy. It doesn't.

For those who can focus on a question, still I'm wondering who made the nomination and why they have issues with the public knowing this.

From the Nobel website (which you linked to before, I don't know why you missed this part)

Has X been nominated as a candidate for the Nobel Prize, or where do I find a list of Nobel Prize nominees?

According to the Statutes of the Nobel Foundation, information about the nominations is not to be disclosed, publicly or privately, for a period of fifty years. The restriction not only concerns the nominees and nominators, but also investigations and opinions in the awarding of a prize. Nomination information older than fifty years is public. At this web site the Nomination Databases for the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine, 1901-1951 and for the Nobel Peace Prize, 1901-1955 are now available. Nomination Databases for the other prize categories will follow.

Frequently Asked Questions

 

[Modbert]

Classic. All that whining over nothing Si Modo as usual.

 

[Si modo]

Classic. All that whining over nothing Si Modo as usual.

How very irrelevant you are.

 

[Modbert]

How very irrelevant you are.

Ah yes, I'm the irrelevant one with no life. That's right.

It's not you by any chance who feels the need to think her closed minded views are right always. Not only that, but you have to inject said views everywhere.

 

[Si modo]

How very irrelevant you are.

Ah yes, I'm the irrelevant one with no life. That's right.

It's not you by any chance who feels the need to think her closed minded views are right always. Not only that, but you have to inject said views everywhere.

Still irrelevant, I see.

Have a drink.

 

[EriktheRed]

Why is it that we still don't know who nominated Him?

Is this gonna be the new "Where's the birth certificate"?