Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

topic posted Fri, October 9, 2009 - 6:53 AM by  Hoopes
Share/Save/Bookmark
Advertisement
Congratulations to an authentic visionary who risks the lives of himself, his wife, and his children 24/7 to make this world a better place for us all.

Obama Wins the 2009 Nobel Prize for Effort
www.time.com/time/nation...9396,00.html

Nobel Committee Member: Nuclear Disarmament Efforts Won Obama the Prize
blogs.wsj.com/washwire/20...a-the-prize/


posted by:
Hoopes
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

    Fri, October 9, 2009 - 7:09 AM
    The Nobel Peace Prize for 2009

    The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided that the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009 is to be awarded to President Barack Obama for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples. The Committee has attached special importance to Obama's vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons.

    Obama has as President created a new climate in international politics. Multilateral diplomacy has regained a central position, with emphasis on the role that the United Nations and other international institutions can play. Dialogue and negotiations are preferred as instruments for resolving even the most difficult international conflicts. The vision of a world free from nuclear arms has powerfully stimulated disarmament and arms control negotiations. Thanks to Obama's initiative, the USA is now playing a more constructive role in meeting the great climatic challenges the world is confronting. Democracy and human rights are to be strengthened.

    Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world's attention and given its people hope for a better future. His diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world's population.

    For 108 years, the Norwegian Nobel Committee has sought to stimulate precisely that international policy and those attitudes for which Obama is now the world's leading spokesman. The Committee endorses Obama's appeal that "Now is the time for all of us to take our share of responsibility for a global response to global challenges."

    Oslo, October 9, 2009

    nobelprize.org/nobel_priz.../press.html
    • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

      Fri, October 9, 2009 - 7:13 AM
      I voted for Obama as the lesser of evils, but feel even more conned now than I thought I would be. He has been a continuation of catstrophe:

      "Listen up Howdy Doody; you're a waste of carbon, oxygen and water, not to mention space. You're a low-down, snake-eyed liar and a paid political whore for the nastiest psychopaths on the planet. I understand you wouldn't be president otherwise but that doesn't justify it. I remember little things that clued me early on. I remember Warren Buffet being in your corner and then I remembered Warren Buffet and Jacob Rothschild meeting with Schwarzenegger. I remember little things and vague associations across time. I also remember the things people say because I actually listen to them.

      As soon as I saw you, my first thought was, "there goes a cool cucumber of a long tall drink of water from the Lincoln Reflecting Pool, minus the Lincoln". You reminded me of one of those Chicago Pimps without the leopard skin coat. Politics is a world of strange contradictions. That's how you can be both a pimp and a whore at the same time and have it make perfect sense.

      I know there are those who will say it's a big job being president of, the soon to no longer be, the most powerful nation on Earth. Maybe that's why people can imagine that a lot of what gets done there isn't your decision. However, I know the impact the president can have on policy and I also know that even with powerful opposition, the president can stand for the right thing.

      You were elected on the platform of 'hope and change'. Hope's a hard thing to kill because it will remain as long as fools can dream. The only change I've seen is that you've expanded the theater of the conflicts you swore to end. I'm especially intrigued about your hypocrisy over the Guantanamo detainees. Any one who wants to, knows that most of those people were kidnapped and sold by opportunistic warlords and, since 9/11 was done by the former administration, in tandem with Israel, there are no other 9/11 terrorists.

      Hi-ranking members of the CIA have gone on record that there is no Al Qaeda. That's what makes hiring Blackwater to kill Al Qaeda operatives so damned ironic. If there's no Al Qaeda, and there is no Al Qaeda, then it must mean that someone other than Al Qaeda is being killed all along. Since Bin Laden's been dead for years, the constant mention of his name every time you need to scare the public is also pretty low down. I realize that it is the Israeli controlled press that is responsible for this, just as I am certain that Israel controls everything you say and do. It's got to be a hard thing for the black people to have come so far from slavery only to have one of their own become president and then sell his ass to the descendents of those who operated many of the slave ships AND the slum housing AND the pawn shops AND the liquor stores AND the film industry that portrayed them as Stepin Fetchits and google-eyed retards for such a long time. That's pretty cold, Mr. President. That's pretty cold.

      Let's be perfectly clear here, all the evidence points to 9/11 being an inside job that was accomplished by elements in the American and Israeli governments. The beneficiaries of the attack have been fascist elements of the American government and Israel. All the conflicts that followed were orchestrated by dual national Zio-cons in key positions in government and the corporate and media realms. The looming assault on Iran is being drummed up by the same elements. Israel, who does possess nuclear weapons, is in violation of all the things they are demanding from Iran. Iran is not in violation of all the things that Israel and the Israeli-occupied American governments are demanding from them.

      So, consider this Mr. President, if your Zionist occupied government in tandem with Israel, carried out the 9/11 attacks; then for what reason have millions been murdered and displaced in Afghanistan, Iraq and now Pakistan? For what reason are all these people dying? If they have no association with 9/11 and the only acts they are committing are in defense of their nation against a pernicious invader then they are not terrorists, they are freedom fighters.

      If the Taliban successfully stopped the opium production in Afghanistan why is it now more abundant than at any time in history? Why is this now being blamed on the Taliban who stopped it in the first place?

      Now your government is pulling out all the stops to sink the Goldstone Report. Who owns your ass Mr. President?

      You're pounding the pavement for a comprehensive American health plan. Behind the scenes you are cutting deals with the pharmaceutical industry and the rest of the vultures that have keep affordable health care out of America all these years while most every other country has one. I realize the title of this post is misleading by omission. You're not just a liar as we can see.

      Your country's economy s crashing around your ears. Madness is already surfacing on your streets. As the winter of American discontent comes lurching through the mist of global cooling, accelerating heating costs and the impact on every other area of the American economy is going to ignite the public rage and perhaps that will keep them warm, Mr. President?

      You gave all their money to the bankers who caused the problems in the first place. One of the things that amaze me is the resilience of the hope so many of your people have placed in you. It appears they are a nation of confused children and I suppose that makes you Gary Glitter.

      During the rule of your predecessor, FEMA concentration camps were built across the nation and constitutional rights were dismantled and done away with. Gratuitous wars based on transparent lies were initiated in foreign lands and then you were elected to put things right and you have allowed all of these things to continue and then some. So why are you here really? You're here to take it to the next step. You're here to set the forces in motion that make the next step necessary. You and your policies and sycophants, at the behest of the psychopaths who own you, are here to instigate the conditions which make that next step unavoidable.

      It's not going to fly Mr. President. All across the course of history, one demagogue and madman after another has attempted to rule the world and they never pulled it off. You won't either. What we are witnessing is not the final stages of a long sought after fait accompli. What we are witnessing is a cosmic, moral play with you and your associates as the object lessons.

      What is it that causes such large numbers of people to follow so many bad leaders into the desert in search of water? What power closes their eyes to the obvious lies and crimes visited upon them? What has made them so dependent and apathetic that they indulge every injury directed at them? Is it materialism and convenience that weakened their spine? Are there hidden technical or magical forces being directed at them? Is it some combination of many things, or is it just human nature? I don't know. I see what I see and one of the things I see is you. I see right through you because you aren't even there. You are composed of colorful smoke that dances before the terrible image of the beast that squats behind you.

      Listen up; you would be prison warders of the planet entire. Your house of cards is set to tumble. The dominoes tremble as the Earth moves beneath them. I won't ask you to see the light and change your ways. This is not something you are inclined or prepared to do. I will say only this to you, watch and see the fearsome destiny that awaits the perennial scoundrels who prey upon their fellows. Watch and see.

      smokingmirrors.wordpress.com/"
  • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

    Fri, October 9, 2009 - 11:11 AM
    peace = no competition
    peace prize = competition

    hmm. ;)
    • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

      Fri, October 9, 2009 - 11:24 AM
      I'm running into more and more people now who finally understand the con. Rip Van Winkle and the eight year sleep is over with.
      There is a restiveness out there looking for an outlet. I always advocate peaceful demonstrations - not violent. Surely Obama must know he is skating on thin ice.
      • Mon
        Mon
        offline 7

        Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

        Fri, October 9, 2009 - 5:13 PM
        Hoopes and Wil, you guys approve of this nomination? Even though the first thing Obama did in his presidency was kill women and children (and a couple supposed terrorists) with a drone attack on Pakistan... www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...5883.ece

        What about his silence during the Gaza War?
        www.huffingtonpost.com/ben-co...49.html

        Of course, since Kissinger and Gore that whole nomination is a pathetic joke...
        and Albert Hoffman never won it even though entire peace movements sprung up from LSD...
        not to mention Mahatma Ghandi....

        And here you guys applaud Obama winning this (and the 1.4 million dollar money prize)...

        I seriously can't believe what I'm reading from you guys.
        • Mon
          Mon
          offline 7

          Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

          Fri, October 9, 2009 - 5:20 PM
          www.cnn.com/2009/POLITIC...ng/index.html

          Obama seeks $200 billion for war spending

          WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Barack Obama will ask Congress for more than $200 billion to fund U.S. war efforts for the next year and a half, according to defense officials.

          The request will be for $75.5 billion for the rest of the 2009 fiscal year to cover the cost of sending more troops to Afghanistan this year and additional $130 billion for 2010, according to the sources.

          War spending for 2010 will be part of the president's overall defense funding request, which is expected to be announced Thursday.

          The money will be in addition to $534 billion for the U.S. Defense Department's other expenditures, which the president is expected to request from Congress.

          Congress gave the Pentagon $65.9 billion for the first half of fiscal 2009.
          --------------------------------------------------------







          >>> What a sad, sad situation...
          • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

            Fri, October 9, 2009 - 5:43 PM
            I hate war, but I'm still sore at the Taliban for destroying uncountable, irreplaceable Buddhist antiquities, among them the beautiful Buddhas of Bamiyan. It's an ugly mess and not one where the humanitarian solution is to just pick up and leave. The American people were fools to have been diverted from Afghanistan to Iraq. Reagan's support of the Mujahedeen and the grotesque failures of the Bush administration can't be undone. It's easy to criticize Obama on Afghanistan, but what would *you* do there?

            My heart sinks at the thought that what 2012 may actually bring is the first terrorist attack that utilizes a nuclear device. What would *you* do to prevent that from happening, especially given that people or a place that you love may be the target?
            • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

              Fri, October 9, 2009 - 10:19 PM
              Afghanistan: Film Revisits Destruction Of Bamiyan Buddhas
              www.rferl.org/content/Art...1067101.html

              "While the film focuses on the Taliban's refusal to permit these Buddhist icons on its territory, it also explores accusations that the objections of the outside world were in part to blame for the destruction of the sculptures.

              "Some of the people interviewed in 'The Giant Buddhas' say the West was just as intolerant of the Taliban as the Taliban was intolerant of Buddhist imagery. This, they say, may have led the Taliban to believe they had to blow up the statues.

              "As the film slowly approaches the actual destruction of the statues, it includes excerpts from television news broadcasts of world leaders urging the Taliban to spare the Bamiyan Buddhas.

              "But perhaps the most eloquent commentary on the demolition was from an unnamed Afghan who lives with his family in a Bamiyan cave, just has his ancestors did before him.

              "'The Taliban were happy,' the man says. 'They had destroyed something that could never be rebuilt. It was gone forever. They clapped their hands and jumped around and danced for joy.'

              "The man tells of the trouble the Taliban had trying to destroy the effigies. First, he said, they brought in tanks to open fire with their cannons, but the statues wouldn't fall. They tried dynamite, but that, too, failed.

              "Finally, the man says, the Taliban enlisted the help of explosives experts from Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. But Frei, the film's director, emphasizes there's no evidence the governments of these two countries were involved in the destruction of the Buddhas."

              Buddhas of Bamyan
              en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhas_of_Bamyan
              • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                Sat, October 10, 2009 - 12:30 AM
                I met a traveller from an antique land
                Who said: Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
                Stand in the desert. Near them, on the sand,
                Half sunk, a shatter'd visage lies, whose frown
                And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command
                Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
                Which yet survive, stamp'd on these lifeless things,
                The hand that mocked them and the heart that fed.
                And on the pedestal these words appear:
                "My name is Ozymandias, king of kings:
                Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"
                Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
                Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare,
                The lone and level sands stretch far away.[1]
                • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                  Sat, October 10, 2009 - 9:19 AM
                  the comparison of earthly kings to Buddhas is inappropriate, as tyranny and power are the tendencies of tyrants who rule, while compassion & wisdom are the undying legacy of Buddhas (rulers of heart,mind,spirit,meadow, earthly mountainous wonders, and such). I realize those who refer to this particular matter are perhaps Several steps Removed from being Able to comment upon Buddhism as a Functional principle behind the large stone iconography, but for the Sake of those who Are, I may lift a finger for the sake of Dharma. We don't so much despair just at the loss of once beautiful sculpture devoted to Serenity of Mind, (a psycho-spiritual commodity which even the most enlightened struggle with in these times), but take note of the Evident need to dispel ignorance and delusion, which is multi-faceted. ... A contrarian purposing motivating those who may only respond in the most negative perceptions of possible contexts/archetypes, and in the anti-thesis of 'mindedness' relative to the very notion of highmindedness itself, i.e. gross physical destruction.
              • Cultural purging

                Sat, October 10, 2009 - 10:08 AM
                This is an ongoing story not history. Please read this for gnosis....
                www.tamilnation.org/tamileel...mples.htm

                an excerpt... Culture plays a crucial role in the life of a community. A community or a people is identified and revered by its flourishing culture. History shows that an oppressor.... aims to erase the identity of the oppressed and this means destroying first the oppressed people's culture. It is for this reason that the liberation struggle of an oppressed people also assumes the form of cultural resistance.

                In Tamil Eelam the culture and civilisation of the Tamils, which has a long, rich and valuable history is undergoing destruction on an unprecedented scale. Whilst on the one side, the Tamil national liberation struggle.. strives towards defending and protecting Tamil people's identity and life, on the other, the Sri Lankan government... has taken the path of causing maximum destruction to the culture of the Tamil people....continued...
            • Mon
              Mon
              offline 7

              Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

              Sat, October 10, 2009 - 8:28 PM
              pp: "...It's easy to criticize Obama on Afghanistan, but what would *you* do there?..."

              >>> You're asking me what *I* would do if *I* were in a position that *I* would never be in, so that's a tough call...
              Not to mention that the integrity of the story around the War on Terror, Afghanistan, Iraq and Al Qaida is by no means a consensus.
              So instead of writing a book here, I'll leave it at what I wrote before: It's imo a sad situation that so many people see this guy as among history's greatest peace loving people...
          • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

            Fri, October 9, 2009 - 6:28 PM
            Perhaps if you can picture the balance of yin and yang in All of Nature Ramon you would see that this ongoing struggle is the price of peace and freedom which I can only assume you enjoy. It has a nasty price tag my friend and not just in currency. What little peace there is has been achieved by major pain and sacrifice through ages of struggle. In a perfect world your dream would be realized easily but this is not that world, this is a world of duality, yin can not be if there is no yang to oppose it. We must be realistic as well as idealistic. The big picture (the Tai Chi) is composed of two forces that does not change. To choose one is to deny the other and conflict will arise, choose peace and you awaken dreams of war, choose war and awaken dreams of peace. They both arise as Tai Chi complimentary, balancing parts of the whole. Like it or not it is the way of the 10,000 things (everything of and on Earth). That is why Eastern mystics follow the Middle Path it offers some peace at the price of some war and finds a balance where all can be alive.
            ...just offering some thoughts to consider. It's not about Obama or the U.S. war machine, it is about Complete Reality of Nature. And we are it...................
            • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

              Fri, October 9, 2009 - 7:26 PM
              that kinda yin yang sounds kinda parasitic in nature really huh? i imagine when something like Socialism or Communism hit the right note, a more even yin yang might be achieved.
              • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                Fri, October 9, 2009 - 7:46 PM
                it might seem parasitic but I think it is more symbiotic. I don't think our existence in it's past or present evolutionary stages can support anything but duality. My hunch is that the whole 2012 deal is a recognition and yearning for something completely different. John Lennon's "Imagine" comes to mind...Oneness without boundaries self-hood without thought of self-ness or differ-ence. We as a species are not yet ready for that leap but more are approaching this threshold of Unity. If the "Hundreth Monkey" theory proves true than we will be swept into it en mass at the tipping point of consciousness and it will make perfect sense. We can prepare now but we must practice patience for Nature to lead. That means finding the peace that Ramon and we all crave within to secure at least that and then share it as if Unity is here now and as that explodes exponentially it shall be so..............peace and war are minor acts.....In the Big Picture Unity is the cure for Duality.........
                • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                  Fri, October 9, 2009 - 7:54 PM
                  which existing, if any, political/economic paradigm or ideal (most) signifies non-duality?
                  • This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.

                    Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                    Fri, October 9, 2009 - 8:15 PM
                    <<<which existing, if any, political/economic paradigm or ideal (most) signifies non-duality? >>>
                    I have met indigenous shaman who lived this concept but no established religious or political group has mastered it and I don't think they can...>>>>YET!!!
                    One example...
                    When I first met one Peruvian sound healer (Tito La Rosa) I thought I was wise introducing myself as Amigo (friend) and he looked at me quizzically shook his head embraced me and said... Hermano (brother). I was humbled by his Unity............
                    • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                      Fri, October 9, 2009 - 8:24 PM
                      > have met indigenous shaman who lived this concept but no established religious or political group has mastered it and I don't think they can...>>>>YET!!! <

                      yea this kinda reminds me of that quote in the Troll Control thread about organising a village around the village idiot.. i wonder if 'fakin it until you make it' might apply to those under an order of non-duality;

                      The Panopticon is a type of prison building designed by English philosopher and social theorist Jeremy Bentham in 1785. The concept of the design is to allow an observer to observe (-opticon) all (pan-) prisoners without the prisoners being able to tell whether they are being watched, thereby conveying what one architect has called the "sentiment of an invisible omniscience."[1]
                      Bentham himself described the Panopticon as "a new mode of obtaining power of mind over mind, in a quantity hitherto without example."
                      en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panopticon
            • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

              Fri, October 9, 2009 - 7:35 PM
              there is no 'world of duality', there is choice.

              within the perfect center point there is no right/wrong and thus there is perfectly equal choice.. peace or war? both exist, yes.. which do you choose?

              repeat that a few billion times and there is peace.. There may not be total inner peace for all immediatelyy, yet that road will be much clearer and the nature of the nature is that much more apparent. the yin/yang symbol demonstrates understanding of the yin in yang and the yang in yin, duality from that pov is seen to be as much about perspective as anything else and also allows for realisation that when you change perspective anything is possible..
              the impossible is only impossible because of the rules you are using. ;)
              • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                Fri, October 9, 2009 - 8:05 PM
                I think we fundamentally agree but choice encourages duality Nick...one thing or another I chose this one you choose another. Yin and yang, same coin but different faces each different even with element of the other present. If you make a choice then you raise one and diminish the other. Embracing yin and yang is not choosing, at least according to the theories of the Tao Te Ching, but allowing and following the entire spectrum of nature without judging peace as more (or less desirable) than war. They are the same coin and either one will raise contention. You are choosing the yin with a little yang over the yang with a little yin. The I Ching says whichever you choose it will certainly cycle to change...the only escape is to cherish them both for the balance they create together. Peace through Unity not through choice is the message of Tao. When ALL is One what need is there to contend or choose...................
                • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                  Fri, October 9, 2009 - 8:12 PM
                  there is choice to walk left without diminishing right..
                  there is choice to speak without diminishing silence.
                  there is choice to not diminish.


                  you do not need to judge war or peace to be peace... this is peace. :)
                  • This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.

                    Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                    Fri, October 9, 2009 - 8:23 PM
                    <<you do not need to judge war or peace to be peace... this is peace. :) >>
                    yes as I said we agree on being peace that does not change the fact that others do not yet choose as you and I do.
                    You are peace and that is peace but the world around you is not yet at peace. Even the Nobel Peace award has caused contention and conflict to arise from a choice. I applaud your peace and I know you will share it I too walk this path...when all do then there is world peace...
                    • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                      Fri, October 9, 2009 - 8:30 PM
                      Chapter 2 of the Tao Te Ching

                      When people see some things as beautiful,
                      other things become ugly.
                      When people see some things as good,
                      other things become bad.

                      Being and non-being create each other.
                      Difficult and easy support each other.
                      Long and short define each other.
                      High and low depend on each other.
                      Before and after follow each other.

                      Therefore the Master
                      acts without doing anything
                      and teaches without saying anything.
                      Things arise and she lets them come;
                      things disappear and she lets them go.
                      She has but doesn't possess,
                      acts but doesn't expect.
                      When her work is done, she forgets it.
                      That is why it lasts forever.
                      • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                        Fri, October 9, 2009 - 8:45 PM
                        oh that was good, thanks.

                        but i don't get the last sentence.. what is "it" - non-duality?
                        • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                          Fri, October 9, 2009 - 8:54 PM
                          here is a different translation that might help there are others....I think "it" in that version refered to her work which is basically being.

                          2
                          All in the world know the beauty of the beautiful, and in doing
                          this they have (the idea of) what ugliness is; they all know the skill
                          of the skilful, and in doing this they have (the idea of) what the
                          want of skill is.

                          So it is that existence and non-existence give birth the one to
                          (the idea of) the other; that difficulty and ease produce the one (the
                          idea of) the other; that length and shortness fashion out the one the
                          figure of the other; that (the ideas of) height and lowness arise from
                          the contrast of the one with the other; that the musical notes and
                          tones become harmonious through the relation of one with another; and
                          that being before and behind give the idea of one following another.

                          Therefore the sage manages affairs without doing anything, and
                          conveys his instructions without the use of speech.

                          All things spring up, and there is not one which declines to show
                          itself; they grow, and there is no claim made for their ownership;
                          they go through their processes, and there is no expectation (of a
                          reward for the results). The work is accomplished, and there is no
                          resting in it (as an achievement).

                          The work is done, but how no one can see;
                          'Tis this that makes the power not cease to be.
                        • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                          Fri, October 9, 2009 - 9:06 PM
                          The servers seem overloaded tonight.......
                          "it refers to her work which is actually her being...
                          here is another translation ...there are many...

                          Chapter 2

                          When the world knows beauty as beauty, ugliness arises
                          When it knows good as good, evil arises
                          Thus being and non-being produce each other
                          Difficult and easy bring about each other
                          Long and short reveal each other
                          High and low support each other
                          Music and voice harmonize each other
                          Front and back follow each other
                          Therefore the sages:
                          Manage the work of detached actions
                          Conduct the teaching of no words
                          They work with myriad things but do not control
                          They create but do not possess
                          They act but do not presume
                          They succeed but do not dwell on success
                          It is because they do not dwell on success
                          That it never goes away
            • Mon
              Mon
              offline 7

              Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

              Sat, October 10, 2009 - 8:43 PM
              pp:"...In a perfect world your dream would be realized easily but this is not that world, this is a world of duality, yin can not be if there is no yang to oppose it. We must be realistic as well as idealistic...."

              >>> I do recognize the principle of polarity in life, but I'm having a hard time seeing our current state as balanced... From where I'm at, it seems as if we (80+ % of the population) are destined for mediocrity and struggle because a small group of dynasties and parasites have gotten the upper hand in the recent past... Illogical (not to mention unethical) distribution of resources, priorities all screwed up, wars raging and new wars in the making....
              With the current state of affairs, this cannot even go on much longer, to the point that many people say the system will soon crumble under the weight of it's own lies, corruption and deceit.
              Are we imbalanced right now or is all as it ever was?
              • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                Sat, October 10, 2009 - 9:39 PM
                There is progress in the midst of chaos. I read somewhere in my travels that only a small percentage are truly awake and aware of the parasites and actively or passively oppose the methods of the Powers that operate this collapsing system. 2 percent or so understand the strength of Unity and Oneness which we are moving toward. The good news is this movement is taking hold and growing much faster now. And believe it or not B. Obama is playing an important role on a global level. Around the planet there is more hope than there was with Bush. He is a politician after all not an Angel. He wouldn't have been elected if he was anything but who he is.
                As things deteriorate more of the downtrodden, 80% as you said...are disillusioned, or forced to seek new paradigms. That's a lot of recruits for us to educate. Change is constant and the direction is becoming more clear. If we are swinging back from extreme yang then we are headed for balance, not there yet. And then we get a chance to develop yin until we max that out and head back to center once again. Lifetimes are involved and we are such an impatient species..........that is the long term view of going with the flow. We are flowing to the beat of Nature not mankind. It is bigger than bankers and dynasties, and will not be deterred or detoured. In Taoism it is not the destination that is important but the journey, the moment of NOW and how we choose to be in it. If you can smile right now you are free to be. It is tough but if you just start by turning up the corners of your mouth your journey has begun, screw the stressing about the destination it will come on it's own.
  • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

    Sat, October 10, 2009 - 10:15 AM
    Tells you a lot about the state of Peace around the world.
    Sure sign of all out nuclear holocaust when warmongers are awarded prizes for "Peace".
    • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

      Sat, October 10, 2009 - 10:44 AM
      I take it you do not believe he deserves time and encouragement? Did you read his acceptance speech.? After all he inherited a good bit of this from time immemorial and the system does not permit one individual to do much of anything without hoops and barriers.
      I would like to hear what you would propose instead...
      When faced with 1.5 billion Muslims given the green light to over throw infidels everywhere, with religious fervor would you not protest and pray for aid to defend your right to live. Pacifism is easy to talk and a lot harder to endure the many deaths offered by the opposition.
      I too work for peace but also served when drafted because peace has an enormous price tag..............and doesn't appear out of the blue overnight.
      I really would like to hear any solutions you may have to offer while we work on finding peace with the reality that we live........................e
      • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

        Sat, October 10, 2009 - 11:03 AM
        well if it's not moslems it's communists and if it's not communists it's banana republics and if it's not banana republics it's...

        There died a myriad,
        And of the best, among them,
        For an old bitch gone in the teeth,
        For a botched civilization,

        Charm, smiling at the good mouth,
        Quick eyes gone under earth's lid,

        For two gross of broken statues,
        For a few thousand battered books.
    • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

      Sat, October 10, 2009 - 10:44 AM
      well you know how it is...

      prizes exist for people to congratulate themselves not to celebrate others for surviving despite their monopolies etc...

      didn't kissinger get a peace prize too...?
      • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

        Sat, October 10, 2009 - 10:53 AM
        Who gives a shit what five Norwegians (funded by the inventor of dynamite) think anyway?

        nobelpeaceprize.org/en_GB/no.../members/
        • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

          Sat, October 10, 2009 - 11:05 AM
          norwegians are cool...
          • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

            Sat, October 10, 2009 - 11:19 AM
            I got nothing against Norwegians... I like gravlax as much as anyone...

            But who really cares what five middle-aged white people of one nationality think, when their opinions get worldwide attention only because they stand atop a mountain of blood money?

            From Wikipedia article on Alfred Nobel:

            "The erroneous publication in 1888 of a premature obituary of Nobel by a French newspaper, condemning him for his invention of dynamite, is said to have brought about his decision to leave a better legacy after his death.[2] The obituary stated Le marchand de la mort est mort ("The merchant of death is dead") and went on to say, "Dr. Alfred Nobel, who became rich by finding ways to kill more people faster than ever before, died yesterday."[3] On 27 November 1895, at the Swedish-Norwegian Club in Paris, Nobel signed his last will and testament and set aside the bulk of his estate to establish the Nobel Prizes, to be awarded annually without distinction of nationality. He died of a stroke on 10 December 1896 at Sanremo, Italy. He left 31 million kronor (equivalent to about 1.8 billion kronor or 250 million US dollars in 2008) to fund the prizes."
      • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

        Sat, October 10, 2009 - 11:06 AM
        >>didn't kissinger get a peace prize too...? <<

        Sure, he did. And Menachem Begin too. All good guys, advocates of peace.
        • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

          Sat, October 10, 2009 - 1:12 PM
          What utter rubbish! And a rotten scam!

          The 'pie in the sky' 'liberals' who support Obama are apparently happy to sell-out the USA, its people and economy, carry on with forced vaccination programs, carry on with genocide in Afghanistan and Iraq, carry on with oppression of First Nations peoples, carry on towards a NWO and world government ruled by the corporations and their 'philosophers', carry on with the population reduction agenda, carry on with plans to enforce micro-chipping of citizens, carry on with the fake carbon trading/carbon credits scam, carry on with rewarding the Federal reserve bank for being a privately owned corrupt group that creates financial depression, carry on giving vast sums to private banks for helping create massive job losses, evictions/repossessions, massive food price increases, destruction of rainforest for bio-fuels, etc.

          Obama is as much a war-monger and racist as his predecessors. Giving him a Nobel Peace Prize is a cruel joke just like the ones that Kissinger and Gore have had!
          During his election speeches to Native people Obama promised alot and has delivered nothing. He is a racist against the American Native population just as his predecessors have been.

          From the LPDOC at: www.whoisleonardpeltier. info

          Obama, Congress, and the UN

          "As most of you know, Leonard Peltier’s fate is now in the hands of President Obama. While many of us hoped that his vision of change included the release of political prisoners and more just policies in Indian Country, there is no evidence to suggest anything of the sort. President Obama and Attorney General Holder have ruled out a meeting with the LPDOC and ignored a week long fast by former support group coordinator Ben Carnes, not to mention executive director Betty Peltier-Solano’s chaining herself to the White House fence. At the United Nations recently, we had meetings scheduled with two world leaders that somehow failed to materialize, perhaps due to pressure from the U.S. government."
  • WTF? Obama Gets the Nobel Peace Prize?

    Mon, October 12, 2009 - 2:35 PM
    >>>"If I were the Dalai Lama or Nelson Mandela, I would return my Nobel Peace Prize to protest this year's award to Obama, who in addition to all the crimes described in this article (i.e., Guantanamo and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan) is also leading the country with the highest number of nuclear weapons in the world and the highest number of military bases (185) in foreign countries; and who still doesn't accept the idea that a U.S. military guilty of war crimes can be judged in an international court."


    WTF? Obama Gets the Nobel Peace Prize?

    www.thiscantbehappening.net/

    Fri, 10/09/2009 - 14:05 — dlindorff
    It’s not as much of a travesty as when Henry Kissinger, a war criminal of the first order who was an architect of the latter stages of the Indochina War, and was personally responsible for the slaughter of well over a million innocent people, won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1973, while that war was still raging, but the awarding of the latest Nobel Peace Prize to President Barack Obama is travesty enough.

    We’re talking about a man whose practically first act upon taking office early this year was to escalate the ugly and pointless war in Afghanistan with the addition of some 20,000 troops, and who, even as the Nobel committee was discussing his award, was meeting with his military and political advisors to consider expanding that war even further, both in Afghanistan and across the border into Pakistan.

    The Nobel Committee claimed that during Obama’s short period as president, the US “is now playing a more constructive role in meeting the great climatic challenges the world is confronting. Democracy and human rights are to be strengthened. "

    Well, certainly when compared to the prior presidency of George W. Bush, that statement is correct, but that’s not saying much. After all, under President Obama, Guantanamo’s terrorist prison is still in operation and is holding people whom even the government admits are guilty of nothing. Under President Obama, the US has also blocked the Goldstone Report which condemns Israel of war crimes in its recent assault on Gaza. And under Obama, the US military in Afghanistan has continued to slaughter disproportionate numbers of civilians through its wanton use of aerial bombardment, pilotless Predator drones, and antipersonnel weaponry.

    President Obama may have, as the Nobel Committee states, put forward a vision of nuclear disarmament, but his administration at the same time continues to refuse to sign the international anti-landmine treaty (putting America in the wretched company of just Russia, India and China). And under Obama, the US continues its role as not only the leading producer and exporter of arms, but also as the major initiator of wars in the world. Under Obama the US continues to outspend the rest of the world’s nations combined on its military. And don’t forget, Obama, like President Bush before him, continues to threaten to attack Iran, over that nation’s alleged nuclear weapons program—a program the very existence of which remains highly debatable.

    As for climate change policy, President Obama in practice has taken a largely hands-off approach to getting Congress to act, not using his considerable political clout to force action on climate change legislation. It is now conceded that the US will go to the international climate conference in December with no bill passed to limit or reduce the nation’s CO2 emissions. Nor is the Obama administration likely to push for any significant program of CO2 reductions in the future.

    Nominations for this year’s Nobel Peace Prize closed on Feb. 1, less than two weeks after Obama took the oath of office as President, but the Nobel Committee in Norway had a good nine months since then to observe this president’s actions—and his lack of actions—on the key issues weighing on the decision. In the end, committee members were bamboozled by this president’s rhetoric of hope just as were the American people during the election campaign. As the committee wrote in announcing its decision: "Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world’s attention and given its people hope for a better future."

    If Nobel Peace prizes are being awarded to people who are simply giving the world hope, surely the judges could have found any number of worthy speechifiers. Hell, even the dictatorial leaders of China and North Korea can make flowery speeches about peace and human dignity. More to the point, the committee had under consideration at least two far more deserving nominees for the award who were actually acting at great personal risk to further peace and human rights: Chinese freedom-fighter Hu Jia and Afghani women’s rights advocate Simi Samar. It is an insult to the memory of former award winners like the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jody Williams, Nelson Mandela, Aung San Suu Kyi the Dalai Lama, Lech Walesa, and others who put their lives and careers on the line to struggle for peace and human dignity to give this award to a man who has accomplished so little, and who, in fact, in his short time in office, has managed to expand one war, to block the international condemnation of the brutality of another, and who has done nothing to reverse his own country’s leading role as a promoter of war and international violence.

    Henry Kissinger hung his blood-drenched Nobel Peace Award on his office wall on Wall Street and continued to make obscene sums of money off human suffering in his dotage. One can only hope (ah, that intoxicating word!) that President Obama will take his award seriously, and will use his new status as official man of peace to halt America’s campaign of violence in Afghanistan, calling a regional peace conference to settle that conflict instead of simply expanding the war, that he will announce a major cut in American military spending and a halt to arms exports, that he will sign the landmine treaty and voluntarily end the production and use of antipersonnel weapons of all kinds, and that he will finally have the US join the International Criminal Court of Justice.

    Right. Now that's the audacity of hope.
    • Re: WTF? Obama Gets the Nobel Peace Prize?

      Mon, October 12, 2009 - 2:49 PM
      obviously if they were to give a genuine prize for peace it would go to a hopeless impoverished marginalised loser pacifist who couldn't even get a job or a GF...

      but what kinda message would that be to the world and future generations...?

      the world needs ruthless winners to lord it over them not loser wimps... hahaha

      www.youtube.com/watch
      • Re: WTF? Obama Gets the Nobel Peace Prize?

        Mon, October 12, 2009 - 3:05 PM
        The one upside I see to this awarding is that Obama now forever has a monkey on his back with regard to war making decisions. It is going to make it very hard for him to fall in line with Israel's clamor for war on Iran now. This may have been a very clever move on the part of the Nobel Committee.
        • Re: WTF? Obama Gets the Nobel Peace Prize?

          Mon, October 12, 2009 - 3:30 PM
          Interesting insight Solari... Let's hope so.
          • Re: WTF? Obama Gets the Nobel Peace Prize?

            Tue, October 13, 2009 - 3:55 AM
            Obama has been trying everything he can to avoid a war situation between Iran and Isreal, including trying his hardest to hold out an arm of peace to Iran, which was scoffed at by Amerdinjad,

            disuading Isreal from making a strike on Iran (which they were planing) then refusing the bunker busting bomb capability of US that Isreal had requested of them to hit Irans nuclear facilities.

            Working hard on diplomatic pressure about the bomb to organise a collective pressure on Iran to allow in weapons inspectors, and most notably geting Russia on borad with that - previously Irans biggest Ally.

            Isreal have already said that if they are not convinced enough is being done they will bomb Iran. If Isreal do that, then the whole area will get even more unstable.

            Obama has also being puting the most pressure any US president has ever put on Isreal publicaly to try and get them to stop settlments.

            He has been deep in peace negoatiations between Syria and Isreal to try and improve peace prospects on Palastine and the situation between Isreal and the Sunni arab states.

            So he is trying and he has been geting a lot of stick in America already for facing up to Isreal as much as he has, acusations of siding with the terroists and turning his back on Americas friends have been aplenty.

            As to Afganistan that country has been fucked up for the last previous 30 years, its a tall order to fix it in just eight months, though i think they should step up development.

            You need to remember tat in 2006 67% of Afghanis supported the US being there and there was only 13% support for teh Taliban. Now however because things are not going very well there that 67% has slipped down to in the 30's.

            Afghanistan is a very tricky problem and Obama is said to be having lots of meetings to try and make his mind up about what is the right course.

            Any of you who say instantly he should pull out, you have to be aware that as soon as they do, chances are the Taliban, current goverment, and drug war lords are likely to get into one hell of a fight and power struggle, and tens of thousands, maybe ven hundreads of thousands should be killed.

            That problem was cuased way before Obama was in office.
            • Re: WTF? Obama Gets the Nobel Peace Prize?

              Tue, October 13, 2009 - 4:48 AM
              <should be killed > - would be killed., lol

              point being of course if you pull out and hundreads of thouands are killed in Afganhistan in a power struggle, and you advocate they do that pull out, that blood to some extent is on your hands.

              It doesnt matter if this problem has been caused between Russia, America and the muslim fundametalists, now its ours to have to saught out as much as Obamas.

              If your happy to risk hundreads of thousands dieing in a pull out, if you have no worries about that at all, that puts a serious question mark over your concern for human life - many of whom will be innocents.

              Sure, argue the case that it could be the best option, if you truely think so, that it could be better if they sought it out for themselves, but dont make that decision lightly, Obama sure as hell isnt.

              He is said to have poured over the new book "lessons in disastor" which has just came out, he read it as soon as it came out, that compares Afghanistan now to Vietnam at the time Lyndon Johnson was taking over from Kenndy, and he is said to be deep in tought about it, and has already had 5 major meetings with his advisors to try and work out stratergy.

              At least someone is taking the decision as to what the best path to take wiht the serioiusness it deserves.
              • Mon
                Mon
                offline 7

                Re: WTF? Obama Gets the Nobel Peace Prize?

                Tue, October 13, 2009 - 12:27 PM
                pp: "...Obama now forever has a monkey on his back with regard to war making decisions...."

                >>> In reverse, he will always have a Peace Prize, so his military decisions will always have an air of him making "tough calls for Peace"...

                pp: "...Obama has been trying everything he can to avoid a war situation between Iran and Isreal, including trying his hardest to hold out an arm of peace to Iran, which was scoffed at by Amerdinjad, disuading Isreal from making a strike on Iran (which they were planing) then refusing the bunker busting bomb capability of US that Isreal had requested of them to hit Irans nuclear facilities..."

                >>> Wow, I didn't know you sat right next to him all this time, and right next to Ahmedinejad, and Israel, etc etc. How can you be so sure of all this? What if I say it's all a big puppet show, can you prove me wrong? Some "opponents" come up with a crazy scandalous law proposal, Obama puts a stop to it, and he's the great hero... www.youtube.com/watch

                pp: "...Obama has also being puting the most pressure any US president has ever put on Isreal publicaly to try and get them to stop settlments..."

                >>> Oh come on dude, where the hell do you get your information?

                Obama comes to aid of Israel over UN war crimes charges:

                "...Israel launched a massive 22-day offensive against an unprotected population. It faced almost no opposition in Gaza as evidenced by the huge disparity in casualties. On the Palestinian side, 1,400 people—the majority of them civilians, including 400 women and children—were killed, at least 5,000 people injured, and 21,000 homes destroyed as well as much of the vital infrastructure. On the Israeli side, 13 people died, and several of these were the result of "friendly fire...."

                "...The Obama administration came almost immediately to the aid of Tel Aviv, sharply criticising the report as unfair to Israel and for supposedly failing to deal fully with Hamas’s role before and during the conflict. The recommendation that Israel be referred to the ICC was summarily dismissed..." windowintopalestine.blogspot.com/2...ml

                pp: "...You need to remember tat in 2006 67% of Afghanis supported the US being there and there was only 13% support for teh Taliban...."

                >>> Source please?

                pp: "...Any of you who say instantly he should pull out, you have to be aware that as soon as they do, chances are the Taliban, current goverment, and drug war lords are likely to get into one hell of a fight and power struggle, and tens of thousands, maybe ven hundreads of thousands should be killed..."

                >>> "...But first we need to be clear about is what the war is not about. It’s not about oil. Or pipelines. Or bases. It’s not about the War on Terror™. It’s not about the war on drugs. [...] So if the Afghan war is about anything, it’s about pride. The US (and us) can’t be seen to be defeated by a ragtag group of peasants and refugees - because when you look at the globe, there are a lot of people that match that description and the last ten years have shown that it’s exactly these types of forces that can defeat modern armies. ‘Our’ forces can’t win, and they can’t retreat; the only solution chickenhawk politicians suggest is to throw more young lads into the line of fire and drop more explosives on more people, escalating the conflict. It’s worth recalling the suggestion of a US general during the last years of the Vietnam War: “Can’t we just declare victory and leave?..." www.schnews.co.uk/archive/news684.php

                pp: "...point being of course if you pull out and hundreads of thouands are killed in Afganhistan in a power struggle..."

                >>> Who's your source for this Elo?

                pp: "...At least someone is taking the decision as to what the best path to take wiht the serioiusness it deserves. ..."

                >>> I call dog-and-pony show shenenigans on Obama and his supposed sincere deliberations. America supposedly is the Great Satan, and will never do anything good in the eyes of Islamic fundamentalists. America has tried for a very long time without success. Time to declare defeat/victory, pull out, and if that endangers the people of Afghanistan perhaps another country (like Egypt, Saudi Arabia or Dubai) can step up to the plate to establish a security force there?

                Maybe you should consider to stop watching the mainstream media news Elo: www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/...638/pg1
                • Re: WTF? Obama Gets the Nobel Peace Prize?

                  Tue, October 13, 2009 - 1:15 PM
                  Note:

                  If anyone ever gets tired of "censored mediashit" that we only recieve here in the US and britton then it sometimes helps to read what the rest of the world thinks! you can try en.rian.ru/ for one, and there are many others out there online that people can read unbiased news from around the world without the mediashit censorships from the elite money powers of the Americas controlling what you read!
                  • This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.

                    Re: WTF? Obama Gets the Nobel Peace Prize?

                    Tue, October 13, 2009 - 1:58 PM
                    I like these two as well. Funny that Haaretz is actually less muzzled on Zionist doings than our own mass media here in the US.

                    www.uruknet.info/

                    www.haaretz.com
                    • Re: WTF? Obama Gets the Nobel Peace Prize?

                      Tue, October 13, 2009 - 2:33 PM
                      Thanks Solari and I believe that if more people would check these outer news sources and learn how the rest of the world views us then we would be much better in being able to see what America needs in our next election! My sister lived in Brazil for about 15 years and she says that the rest of the world thinks that we are really stupid and no longer a world power worth following... But of course Bush had a lot to do with this but still, the worlds view on America is one of total disgust... and why do the terrorist hate us again? It's not only them but the mojority of the world and believe it or not, the rest of the world is looking to remove the dollar from their currency as the underlieing note and if this ever happens then the US will be a third world power! The world powers are moving their pieces right now to make just such a thing happen and if Obama wants to "earn" his peace prize, then he'll figure out a way to get America back on track and quit playing the "hope" game...
  • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

    Tue, October 13, 2009 - 2:17 PM
    Chavez says Obama did "nothing" to deserve Nobel
    Sun Oct 11, 2009 12:56pm EDT

    CARACAS (Reuters) - Venezuela's socialist leader Hugo Chavez said on Sunday that U.S. President Barack Obama had done nothing beyond wishful thinking to earn the Nobel Peace Prize.

    Chavez, who has mixed praise for Obama personally with criticism of his government's "imperialist" policies, said he thought it was a mistake when he read the U.S. leader had won.

    "What has Obama done to deserve this prize? The jury put store on his hope for a nuclear arms-free world, forgetting his role in perpetuating his battalions in Iraq and Afghanistan, and his decision to install new military bases in Colombia," Chavez wrote in a column.

    "For the first time, we are witnessing an award with the nominee having done nothing to deserve it: rewarding someone for a wish that is very far from becoming reality."

    Chavez said giving Obama the Nobel award was like giving a baseball pitcher a prize simply for saying he was going to win 50 games and strike out 500 batters.

    Although mild compared to some of the virulent rhetoric he often uses against the United States, Chavez's criticism contrasted with the assessment of his mentor, Fidel Castro.

    The former Cuban leader said it was "a positive measure" that implied criticism of the "genocidal" policies of Obama's predecessors in the White House.

    Though Caracas and Washington have hostile political relations, the United States remains the main buyer of oil from the OPEC member nation.


    >>> If you think about, Obama has the right attitude but as people around the globe are starting to point out, a lot of it may just be for show and glory... Only time will tell... I believe that if Obama would "COMPLETELY" destroy our stockpile of nuclear warheads and show the rest of the world that peace is the only answer then maybe and only then would I believe in him and think that he deserves this award! America would also have to start signing all these treaties that the rest of the world is signing to help save our planet also...
  • Mon
    Mon
    offline 7

    Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

    Tue, October 13, 2009 - 8:58 PM
    "...President Barack Obama is dispatching an additional 13,000 US troops to Afghanistan beyond the 21,000 he announced publicly in March, The Washington Post reported Monday. The additional forces are primarily support forces -- such as engineers, medical personnel, intelligence experts and military police -- the Post said, bringing the total buildup Obama has approved for the war-torn nation to 34,000...."
    news.yahoo.com/s/afp/2009...itarytroops
    • Micheal Morr on the prize... take #2...

      Wed, October 14, 2009 - 12:17 PM
      A big kiss for the wife for her wake up call........now he's got it...................please read and consider.........................

      <<<Get Off Obama's Back ...second thoughts from Michael Moore

      Saturday, October 10th, 2009

      Friends,

      Last night my wife asked me if I thought I was a little too hard on Obama in my letter yesterday congratulating him on his Nobel Prize. "No, I don't think so," I replied. I thought it was important to remind him he's now conducting the two wars he's inherited. "Yeah," she said, "but to tell him, 'Now earn it!'? Give the guy a break -- this is a great day for him and for all of us."

      I went back and re-read what I had written. And I listened for far too long yesterday to the right wing hate machine who did what they could to crap all over Barack's big day. Did I -- and others on the left -- do the same?

      We are weary, weary of war. The trillions that will have gone to these two wars have helped to bankrupt us as a nation -- financially and morally. To think of all the good we could have done with all that money! Two months of the War in Iraq would pay for all the wells that need to be dug in the Third World for drinking water! Obama is moving too slow for most of us -- but he needs to know we are with him and we stand beside him as he attempts to turn eight years of sheer madness around. Who could do that in nine months? Superman? Thor? Mitch McConnell?

      Instead of waiting to see what the president is going to do, we all need to be pro-active and push the agenda that we want to see enacted. What keeps us from forming the same local groups we put together to get out the vote last November? C'mon! We're the majority now -- the majority by a significant margin! We call the shots -- and we need to tell this wimpy Congress to get busy and do what we say -- or else.

      All I ask of those who voted for Obama is to not pile on him too quickly. Yes, make your voice heard (his phone number is 202-456-1414). But don't abandon the best hope we've had in our lifetime for change. And for God's sake, don't head to bummerville if he says or does something we don't like. Do you ever see Republicans behave that way? I mean, the Right had 20 years of Republican presidents and they still couldn't get prayer in the public schools, or outlaw abortion, or initiate a flat tax or put our Social Security into the stock market. They did a lot of damage, no doubt about that, but on the key issues that the Christian Right fought for, they came up nearly empty handed. No wonder they've been driven crazy lately. They'll never have it as good again as they've had it since Reagan took office.

      But -- do you ever see them looking all gloomy and defeated? No! They keep on fighting! Every day. Our side? At the first sign of wavering, we just pack up our toys and go home.

      So, at least for this weekend, let us celebrate what people elsewhere are celebrating -- that America now has a sane and smart man in the White House, a man who truly wants a world at peace for his two daughters.

      Many, for the past couple days (yes, myself included), have grumbled, "What has he done to earn this prize?" How 'bout this:

      The simple fact that he was elected was reason enough for him to be the recipient of this year's Nobel Peace Prize.

      Because on that day the murderous actions of the Bush/Cheney years were totally and thoroughly rebuked. One man -- a man who opposed the War in Iraq from the beginning -- offered to end the insanity. The world has stood by in utter horror for the past eight years as they watched the descendants of Washington, Lincoln and Jefferson light the fuse of our own self-destruction. We flipped off the nations on this planet by abandoning Kyoto and then proceeded to melt eight more years worth of the polar ice caps. We invaded two nations that didn't attack us, failed to find the real terrorists and, in effect, ignited our own wave of terror. People all over the world wondered if we had gone mad.

      And if all that wasn't enough, the outgoing Joker presided over the worst global financial collapse since the Great Depression.

      So, yeah, at precisely 11:00pm ET on November 4, 2008, Barack Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize. And the 66 million people who voted for him won it, too. By the time he took the stage at midnight ET in the Grant Park Historic Hippie Battlefield in downtown Chicago, billions of people around the globe were already breathing a huge sigh of relief. It was as if, in that instant, one man did bring the promise of peace to the world -- and most were ready to go wherever he wanted to go to achieve that end. Never before had the election of one man made every other nation feel like they had won, too. When you've got billions of people ready, willing and able to join a cause like this, well, a prize in Oslo is the least that you deserve.

      One other thought. The Peace Prize historically has been given to those who have worked to throw off the yoke of racial discrimination and segregation (Martin Luther King, Jr., Desmond Tutu). I think the Nobel committee, in awarding Obama the prize, was also rewarding the fact that something profound had happened in a nation that was founded on racial genocide, built on racist slavery, and held back for a hundred-plus years by vestiges of hateful bigotry (which can still be found on display at teabagger rallies and daily talk radio). The fact that this one man could cause this seismic historical event to occur -- and to do so with such grace and humility, never succumbing to the bait, but still not backing down (yes, he asked to be sworn in as "Barack Hussein Obama"!) -- is more than reason enough he should be in Oslo to meet the King on December 10. Maybe he could take us along with him. 'Cause I also suspect the Nobel committee was tipping its hat to all of us -- we, the American people, had conquered some of our racism and did the truly unexpected. After seeing searing images of our black fellow citizens left to drown in New Orleans -- and poor whites seeing their own treated no better than the black man they had been raised to hate -- we had all seen enough. It was time for change.

      Thank you, Barack Obama, for giving us the opportunity to redeem ourselves. Now for the tasks ahead. We need you to do all that you promised to do. We need it. The world needs it.

      My prediction for the future? You become the first *two-time* winner of the Nobel Peace Prize! Yeah!

      Fred (that's Norwegian for "Peace"),
      Michael Moore
      MMFlint@aol.com
      MichaelMoore.com>>>
      ..............................................................love from, e................
  • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

    Sun, October 25, 2009 - 1:23 PM
    Obama and the Nobel Prize: When War becomes Peace, When the Lie becomes the Truth

    by Michel Chossudovsky


    When war becomes peace,

    When concepts and realities are turned upside down,

    When fiction becomes truth and truth becomes fiction.

    When a global military agenda is heralded as a humanitarian endeavor,

    When the killing of civilians is upheld as "collateral damage",

    When those who resist the US-NATO led invasion of their homeland are categorized as "insurgents" or "terrorists".

    When preemptive nuclear war is upheld as self defense.

    When advanced torture and "interrogation" techniques are routinely used to "protect peacekeeping operations",

    When tactical nuclear weapons are heralded by the Pentagon as "harmless to the surrounding civilian population"

    When three quarters of US personal federal income tax revenues are allocated to financing what is euphemistically referred to as "national defense"

    When the Commander in Chief of the largest military force on planet earth is presented as a global peace-maker,

    When the Lie becomes the Truth.

    Obama's "War Without Borders"

    We are the crossroads of the most serious crisis in modern history. The US in partnership with NATO and Israel has launched a global military adventure which, in a very real sense, threatens the future of humanity.

    At this critical juncture in our history, the Norwegian Nobel Committee's decision to award the Nobel Peace Prize to President and Commander in Chief Barack Obama constitutes an unmitigated tool of propaganda and distortion, which unreservedly supports the Pentagon's "Long War": "A War without Borders" in the true sense of the word, characterised by the Worlwide deployment of US military might.

    Apart from the diplomatic rhetoric, there has been no meaningful reversal of US foreign policy in relation to the George W. Bush presidency, which might have remotely justified the granting of the Nobel Prize to Obama. In fact quite the opposite. The Obama military agenda has sought to extend the war into new frontiers. With a new team of military and foreign policy advisers, the Obama war agenda has been far more effective in fostering military escalation than that formulated by the NeoCons.

    Since the very outset of the Obama presidency, this global military project has become increasingly pervasive, with the reinforcement of US military presence in all major regions of the World and the development of new advanced weapons systems on an unprecdented scale.

    Granting the Nobel Peace Prize to Barack Obama provides legitimacy to the illegal practices of war, to the military occupation of foreign lands, to the relentless killings of civilians in the name of "democracy".

    Both the Obama administration and NATO are directly threatening Russia, China and Iran. The US under Obama is developing "a First Strike Global Missile Shield System":

    "Along with space-based weapons, the Airborne Laser is the next defense frontier. ... Never has Ronald Reagan's dream of layered missile defenses - Star Wars, for short - been as....close, at least technologically, to becoming realized."

    Reacting to this consolidation, streamlining and upgrading of American global nuclear strike potential, on August 11 the Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Air Force, the same Alexander Zelin cited earlier on the threat of U.S. strikes from space on all of his nation, said that the "Russian Air Force is preparing to meet the threats resulting from the creation of the Global Strike Command in the U.S. Air Force" and that Russia is developing "appropriate systems to meet the threats that may arise." (Rick Rozoff, Showdown with Russia and China: U.S. Advances First Strike Global Missile Shield System, Global Research, August 19, 2009)

    At no time since the Cuban missile crisis has the World been closer to the unthinkable: a World War III scenario, a global military conflict involving the use of nuclear weapons.

    1. The so-called missile defense shield or Star Wars initiative involving the first strike use of nuclear weapons is now to be developed globally in different regions of the World. The missile shield is largely directed against Russia, China, Iran and North Korea.

    2. New US military bases have been set up with a view to establishing US spheres of influence in every region of the World as well as surrounding and confronting Russia and China.

    3. There has been an escalation in the Central Asian Middle East war. The "defense budget" under Obama has spiraled with increased allocations to both Afghanistan and Iraq.

    4. Under orders of president Obama, acting as Commander in Chief, Pakistan is now the object of routine US aerial bombardments in violation of its territorial sovereignty, using the "Global War on Terrorism" as a justification.

    5. The construction of new military bases is envisaged in Latin America including Colombia on the immediate border of Venezuela.

    6. Military aid to Israel has increased. The Obama presidency has expressed its unbending support for Israel and the Israeli military. Obama has remained mum on the atrocities committed by Israel in Gaza. There has not even been a semblance of renewed Israeli-Palestinian negotiations.

    7. There has been a reinforcement of the new regional commands including AFRICOM and SOUTHCOM

    8. A new round of threats has been directed against Iran.

    9. The US is intent upon fostering further divisions between Pakistan and India, which could lead to a regional war, as well as using India's nuclear arsenal as an indirect means to threaten China.

    The diabolical nature of this military project was outlined in the 2000 Project for a New American Century (PNAC). The PNAC's declared objectives are:

    defend the American homeland;

    fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theater wars;

    perform the "constabulary" duties associated with shaping the security environment in critical regions;

    transform U.S. forces to exploit the "revolution in military affairs;" (Project for a New American Century, Rebuilding Americas Defenses.pdf, September 2000)

    The "Revolution in Military Affairs" refers to the development of new advanced weapons systems. The militarization of space, new advanced chemical and biological weapons, sophisticated laser guided missiles, bunker buster bombs, not to mention the US Air Force's climatic warfare program (HAARP) based in Gokona, Alaska, are part of Obama's "humanitarian arsenal".

    War against the Truth

    This is a war against the truth. When war becomes peace, the world is turned upside down. Conceptualization is no longer possible. An inquisitorial social system emerges.

    An understanding of fundamental social and political events is replaced by a World of sheer fantasy, where "evil folks" are lurking. The objective of the "Global War on Terrorism" which has been fully endorsed by Obama administration, has been to galvanize public support for a Worldwide campaign against heresy.

    In the eyes of public opinion, possessing a "just cause" for waging war is central. A war is said to be Just if it is waged on moral, religious or ethical grounds. The consensus is to wage war. People can longer think for themselves. They accept the authority and wisdom of the established social order.

    The Nobel Committee says that President Obama has given the world "hope for a better future." The prize is awarded for Obama's

    "extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples. The Committee has attached special importance to Obama's vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons."

    ...His diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world's population. (Nobel Press Release, October 9, 2009)

    The granting of the Nobel "peace prize" to president Barack Obama has become an integral part of the Pentagon's propaganda machine. It provides a human face to the invaders, it upholds the demonization of those who oppose US military intervention.

    The decision to grant Obama the Nobel Peace Prize was no doubt carefully negotiated with the Norwegian Committee at the highest levels of the US government. It has far reaching implications.

    It unequivocally upholds the US led war as a "Just Cause". It erases the war crimes committed both by the Bush and Obama administrations.

    War Propaganda: Jus ad Bellum

    The "Just war" theory serves to camouflage the nature of US foreign policy, while providing a human face to the invaders.

    In both its classical and contemporary versions, the Just war theory upholds war as a "humanitarian operation". It calls for military intervention on ethical and moral grounds against "insurgents", "terrorists", "failed" or "rogue states".

    The Just War has been heralded by the Nobel Committee as an instrument of Peace. Obama personifies the "Just War".

    Taught in US military academies, a modern-day version of the "Just War" theory has been embodied into US military doctrine. The "war on terrorism" and the notion of "preemption" are predicated on the right to "self defense." They define "when it is permissible to wage war": jus ad bellum.

    Jus ad bellum has served to build a consensus within the Armed Forces command structures. It has also served to convince the troops that they are fighting for a "just cause". More generally, the Just War theory in its modern day version is an integral part of war propaganda and media disinformation, applied to gain public support for a war agenda. Under Obama as Nobel Peace Laureate, the Just War becomes universally accepted, upheld by the so-called international community.

    The ultimate objective is to subdue the citizens, totally depoliticize social life in America, prevent people from thinking and conceptualizing, from analyzing facts and challenging the legitimacy of the US NATO led war.

    War becomes peace, a worthwhile "humanitarian undertaking", Peaceful dissent becomes heresy.

    Military Escalation with a Human Face. Nobel Committee grants the "Green Light"

    More significantly, the Nobel peace prize grants legitimacy to an unprecedented "escalation" of US-NATO led military operations under the banner of peacemaking.

    It contributes to falsifying the nature of the US-NATO military agenda.

    Between 40,000 to 60,000 more US and allied troops are to be sent to Afghanistan under a peacemaking banner. On the 8th of October, a day prior to the Nobel Committee's decision, the US Congress granted Obama a 680-billion-dollar defense authorization bill, which is slated to finance the process of military escalation:

    "Washington and its NATO allies are planning an unprecedented increase of troops for the war in Afghanistan, even in addition to the 17,000 new American and several thousand NATO forces that have been committed to the war so far this year".

    The number, based on as yet unsubstantiated reports of what U.S. and NATO commander Stanley McChrystal and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Michael Mullen have demanded of the White House, range from 10,000 to 45,000.

    Fox News has cited figures as high as 45,000 more American soldiers and ABC News as many as 40,000. On September 15 the Christian Science Monitor wrote of "perhaps as many as 45,000."

    The similarity of the estimates indicate that a number has been agreed upon and America's obedient media is preparing domestic audiences for the possibility of the largest escalation of foreign armed forces in Afghanistan's history. Only seven years ago the United States had 5,000 troops in the country, but was scheduled to have 68,000 by December even before the reports of new deployments surfaced. (Rick Rozoff, U.S., NATO Poised For Most Massive War In Afghanistan's History, Global Research, September 24, 2009)

    Within hours of the decision of the Norwegian Nobel committee, Obama met with the War Council, or should we call it the "Peace Council". This meeting had been carefully scheduled to coincide with that of the Norwegian Nobel committee.

    This key meeting behind closed doors in the Situation Room of the White House included Vice President Joe Biden, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, and key political and military advisers. General Stanley McChrystal participated in the meeting via video link from Kabul.

    General Stanley McChrystal is said to have offered the Commander in Chief "several alternative options" "including a maximum injection of 60,000 extra troops". The 60,000 figure was quoted following a leak of the Wall Street Journal (AFP: After Nobel nod, Obama convenes Afghan war council, October 9, 2009)

    "The president had a robust conversation about the security and political challenges in Afghanistan and the options for building a strategic approach going forward," according to an administration official (quoted in AFP: After Nobel nod, Obama convenes Afghan war council October 9, 2009)

    The Nobel committee had in a sense given Obama a green light. The October 9 meeting in the Situation Room was to set the groundwork for a further escalation of the conflict under the banner of counterinsurgency and democracy building.

    Meanwhile, in the course of the last few months, US forces have stepped up their aerial bombardments of village communities in the northern tribal areas of Pakistan, under the banner of combating Al Qaeda.

    www.globalresearch.ca/index.php
    • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

      Sun, October 25, 2009 - 5:17 PM
      <<<<Get Off Obama's Back ...second thoughts from Michael Moore

      Saturday, October 10th, 2009 >

      nice post Emptycloud. something tells me the doubters are going to be smiling on the other side of there face post 2012 when Obamas international strategy which he is playing very long term, may reap dividends then.

      He may just get to get that Nobel Prize twice, as Moore suspects.
      • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

        Mon, October 26, 2009 - 2:22 AM
        Elo man, these guys are conspiracy fundamentalists and there is no actual conversation possible.
        • Unsu...
           

          Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

          Mon, October 26, 2009 - 4:21 PM
          It's hardly "consiracy fundamentalism." Anyone who has followed Obama's track record since he took office can see that he is continuing the imperialist war trajectory.

          As far as Michael Moore's "letters." Michael Moore is a leftwing gatekeeper. He's a tool, putting carefully controlled information into the media. Moore's first letter to Obama (besides glossing over his real track record) ended this way:

          "P.S. Your opposition has spent the morning attacking you for bringing such good will to this country. Why do they hate America so much?"

          Hmm...Obama detractors are America-haters, eh? Sound familiar? Also used during Bush's term to counter anyone opposed to the invasion of Iraq. The same tactics were used in Nazi Germany. Hegelian dialectic at it's best. Divide the people into "for us or against us" when in actuality, both groups are working for the same ends.

          As far as Obama's farcical Nobel Peace Prize win...the nominations had to be in February 1, 2009...12 days after Obama took office. Complete farce.

          The Obama administration has picked up where the Bush administration left off. Troops have been taken out of Iraq, sure, but they've just redeployed to Afghanistan. The death and destruction continues there. Obama has continued across-the-border missile strikes against Pakistan from Afghanistan since he was sworn in. One attack on two rural Pakistani villages, for example, killed 22 people, only eight of whom were suspected of being involved with the Taliban. Obama has toned down the torture (we're told), but he has reinforced "prolonged detention" as acceptable - the ability to capture and hold people indefinitely without charge - which is currently going on. Obama has been verbally aggressive toward Iran, showboating at the G20 summit in PIttsburgh in September, setting the stage for U.S. attacks there. He is also trying to bring in mandatory military service - the brainchild of his Israeli Zionist Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel.

          From an article in the New York Times:

          "With two missile strikes over the past week, the Obama administration has expanded the covert war run by the Central Intelligence Agency inside Pakistan, attacking a militant network seeking to topple the Pakistani government...The strikes are another sign that President Obama is continuing, and in some cases extending, Bush administration policy in using American spy agencies against terrorism suspects in Pakistan, as he had promised to do during his presidential campaign."

          As far as I know, the New York Times is not known for printing conspiracy theory.

          Lord Lightning has no clothes...but in this era of "War is Peace" people are too brainwashed to see it.
          • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

            Mon, October 26, 2009 - 4:26 PM
            well that's great isn't it...?

            for a new boy he's managed to pick up the job really quickly and carry it on at the same level as the experienced dynasty guys before him...

            I say bravo barak...!!!

            an ovation for obama...!!!

            the guy should get a raise...!!!
            • Unsu...
               

              Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

              Mon, October 26, 2009 - 4:36 PM
              I'm pretty sure Barry's been groomed for this for a good long time.
              • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                Mon, October 26, 2009 - 4:42 PM
                well that's great...

                he looks good and has an attractive family...

                and this level of tokenism has been long overdue so it's good it's finally in place...

                and the world cup will be in south africa next year...

                so this stuff just might keep the lid on the pot a bit longer...

                maybe just long enough to find an escape hatch...

                before the bloodletting gets too close to home...
        • Mon
          Mon
          offline 7

          Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

          Mon, October 26, 2009 - 7:47 PM
          pp: "...Elo man, these guys are conspiracy fundamentalists and there is no actual conversation possible. ..."

          >>> Ehm, Wil, ....what do you think of Obama's conduct during the Gaza War, and his administration's immediate, unwavering support of Israel's dismissal of the Goldstein report in which Israel is accused of war crimes?

          Besides that, who are 'these guys' and why do you generalize like that?
          • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

            Tue, October 27, 2009 - 1:40 AM
            ".what do you think of Obama's conduct during the Gaza War, and his administration's immediate, unwavering support of Israel's dismissal of the Goldstein report in which Israel is accused of war crimes? "

            I don't like it even a little bit, as you likely know. Obama has eased our total and disgusting tilt towards israel , but not near enough to suit me. I have other criticisms of obama's moves so far. I have rather more criticisms for my own moves, somehow having failed to achieve perfection and still fucking up. But to me these things are all mixed. I can accept these faults as work to be done, plenty of room for improvement. He is a far far better president than i expected to see in my lifetime and on the whole, i am delighted.

            But i think in your heart you also think that, " I'm pretty sure Barry's been groomed for this for a good long time." and this is the sort of fear that can't be allayed by logic or facts or anything else. It is, in my opinion, a last ditch stand of monotheistic daddy god in drag as a sort of overarching all controlling conspiracy. This is impossible to address in conversation, and when a person already has a contained systemic world view like this, they will simply fit everything to it, and no real dialogue is possible. They already know the truth. Either you see it or you don't, but it is a black/white paradigm that allows no room for color or nuance.
            • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

              Tue, October 27, 2009 - 3:16 AM
              I think Obama could try to do more on Isreal, but thats a US mindset its difficult to completely change right now, with everything in crisis.

              He did put more pressure on Isreal than most US presidents have done before. And you also have to try and remember that with Israel, you cant make peace with them unless you make peace with them.

              As Wil im looking at it from an overall perspective.

              I agree he could and should do a lot more radical stuff, especially on financial market reform. But thats upto progressives geting more vocal and giving him enough backing to be more radical. I am sure Obama would like to be more radical if he felt he could.

              A very good example of that is Van Jones. Obama knows what he is up against with the mainstream media and especialy people like fox. If i pull my media project off we will be pushing a more radical agenda generaly than Obama, and that may help Obama to be more radical in the face of a lot of conservative opposition.

              <They already know the truth. Either you see it or you don't, but it is a black/white paradigm that allows no room for color or nuance. >

              yes i think your right Wil, and i see it very similar in fact to how some right wingers are clinging like mad to there paradigm, say the birthers or health care right wingers.

              IN a time of change, some people react with fear and emotion like this, and define there paradigm in a tribal way.

              But as the world around them shifts, eventually these tribes will change, break up, and morph.

              I find its easy for me myself to define my own personal tribe as that of a "progressive" and then to start to get tribal about promoting its values, but im trying to step out of that now.

              Emotions can be so good, without them humans are empty, but if we let our emotions rule us we can also become fools. Balance of course.
            • Mon
              Mon
              offline 7

              Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

              Tue, October 27, 2009 - 9:32 AM
              pp: "...It is, in my opinion, a last ditch stand of monotheistic daddy god in drag as a sort of overarching all controlling conspiracy...."

              >>> Funny, that's what I think of the admiration people have for Obama; a big daddy that's gonna be there for them, even though decennia of politics have tought us otherwise.

              I personally do not believe he has been groomed by the elites; they just have a great filter system in place and the best candidates (those they can control but who will also win over the hearts of the people) will emerge. I think the Birth Certificate 'conspiracy' was promoted by the elites to give the nuts something to fuss about, and the liberals something to condemn. Ever since, opposition to the White House has been regarded as racism-by-right-wingnuts... First, it was supposedly sour grapes, and now, it's supposedly homegrown terrorists...

              Is it so hard for the Left wing AND the Right wing to grasp that there are people who see through this two party system and recognize that the corporate elites truly hold the power in DC?

              As for 'progress', they've always thrown a couple bones our way, but the war effort is strong as ever and that's where the real money is these days.

              pp: "...Either you see it or you don't, but it is a black/white paradigm that allows no room for color or nuance...."

              >>> With all due respect Wil, think you are guilty of the same thing Wil, in your display of generalizing EVERY form of opposition to the establishment as "conspiracy theorists". It is simply not like that. Sure, I distrust the mainstream media, and there is ample reason to do so if you take a look at who owns the biggest media outlets and have observed their version of 'news' over the years... hardly objective to say the least.

              The knee jerk reaction of condemning 'conspiracy theorists' to their tinfoil laced basements is one of the latest forms of We vs. Them thinking, as is the case with people calling others 'sheeple' or 'obamaaaatrons'...

              It's a good idea to be more flexible instead of Black & White style thinking, but it's not a one way street.

              ----------------------

              As for you Elo, I'm not sure where you get your news, but I know your overall optimism is based on 2012 astronomy magic and that's just as bad as extreme tinfoil hat conspiracy pessimism if you ask me.

              "...U.S. President Barack Obama will not cut the billions of dollars in military aid promised to Israel, a senior U.S. administration official said Wednesday. The $30 billion in aid promised to Israel over the next decade will not be harmed by the world financial crisis, the official told Israel Radio...."
              www.haaretz.com/hasen/spag...070318.html
              • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                Tue, October 27, 2009 - 11:41 AM
                >>> Funny, that's what I think of the admiration people have for Obama; a big daddy that's gonna be there for them, even though decennia of politics have tought us otherwise.

                Oh yeah sure, for many he is just that.

                Elitism stinks and i don't like it a little bit in any form. It is a big problem, the wealthy and powerful using their wealth and power to get more and to pass it to their kids. But i do not think this group is anywhere near as well defined or unchanging as they are generally portrayed. Also, i have been majorly disappointed in the ability and willingness of my fellow non elites to cooperate with each other for common betterment instead of following hierarchical patterns and essentially trying to do the same thing themcellves on a smaller level true, but if they got bigger it would be just the same. That is why is now see it as a human defect and failing and not a "look what they are doing to us" kinda situation. The "look what they are doing to us" thing has definitely been used to justify meanness and shirk responsibility in cases i've seen close up and personal.

                I mean to criticize conspiracy theory and not the people who subscribe to them and apologize for that.
                • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                  Tue, October 27, 2009 - 9:51 PM
                  So, I've always been a fan of U2 and have come to respect Bono immensely. Say what you want, but the man has given considerable effort to bring help to the worst off people on the planet. He has some interesting things to say about Obama.

                  www.nytimes.com/2009/10/18...18bono.html
                  • This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
                    Mon
                    Mon
                    offline 7

                    Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                    Wed, October 28, 2009 - 12:29 AM
                    From Bono's article:

                    pp: Obama: “...We will support the Millennium Development Goals, and approach next year’s summit with a global plan to make them a reality. And we will set our sights on the eradication of extreme poverty in our time...”

                    >>> This sounds really nice, but for many - if not most - it will be too little, too late.
                    What does he mean with extreme poverty? Why not abolish every kind of poverty?
                    Why make the MDG a reality (10 years after the Millennium shift)
                    instead of the UN Declaration of Human Rights?
                    What does he mean with 'in our time'?
                    2 years?
                    20 years?
                    50 years?

                    Besides these pertinent questions regarding the typical vagueness of these political statements, I'm afraid Bono & Obama are simply not addressing the root source of poverty: the private ownership of means of production, the subsequent profiteering and wealth hoarding... the parasitical nature of transactions, rather than symbiotic ones... and the extremely profitable warmongering.

                    I know, I know... I'm "over-simplifying the equation to unrealistic extremes", but doesn't the unnecessary deaths of millions of children demand drastic, radical action more than anything else in the world? How complicated is the equation: millions of living healthy children vs. billions of $$$ for a few?
                    Even a small amount of resources can mean the difference between starvation and salvation.
                    Yet 30 Billion in aid is sent to Israel, the Military Industrial Complex is raking in profits like never before,
                    as are Big Pharma and the financial bankster cartels,
                    while millions of decent people get laid off and evicted by the same banks that got bailed out...
                    not to mention the millions who die from cheaply preventable causes.

                    Oversimplifying?

                    How about people are overcomplicating things, to hide the madness,
                    to justify apathy, ignorance and negligence...?

                    pp: Bono: "...Because the world sees that America might just hold the keys to solving the three greatest threats we face on this planet: extreme poverty, extreme ideology and extreme climate change....

                    >>> ...all of which have the same root cause: private ownership of means of production, capitalist profiteering, dynasty-style wealth hoarding, organized religious ignorance/oppression and Government representatives that are swarmed & swayed by special interest corporate lobbyists and their fat checks...

                    In my personal opinion, it's not American foreign policy that holds the keys to our problems.
                    Instead, it is you and me, from America to Zanzibar, that can free us from the horrors we all wish to see evaporate.
                    But, that is only possible if freedom, education and it's subsequent evolution towards the realization that we are all connected and equal co-heirs of the fruits of this planet, is encouraged.
                    This will of course be most effective if it is enabled and promoted by those who have the most resources, influence and power,
                    and that's the problem right there since it is those people who would 'suffer' the most from such changes,
                    and history has shown us that they have other priorities.

                    ...so I remain pessimistic about the supposed messianic properties of any of them,
                    the sweet words & promises,
                    whether pop stars or presidents.

                    Especially when they ask the poor, sick, starving and powerless to be patient,

                    while the money keeps rolling in.



                    • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                      Thu, October 29, 2009 - 10:52 AM
                      Your points are totally valid, but this is where I personally start seeing a lot of gray area when it comes to *how* information should be driven. Hard facts work for some, but not many...that's not how human's are wired. I think it's *at least* equally effective to keep pumping the relevant info, frame it in the largest context possible, and let people open their eyes at their own pace. Changes become more solidified and get passed on down through generations, hopefully.

                      For example, I could sit here and castigate all the "enlightened" folks here on how eating meat is an assault on all things good, and how foolish and guilty you are if you do, but I'd rather cook people a great vegetarian meal, and have a simple community conversation about grain-fed vs grass fed beef... give people a chance to see some urgency at the level they are comfortable grasping, and then send them back out into the world armed with information that might not change their habits right away, but it sends them in the right direction. When they come back again, maybe then we talk about gmo's, hormones, antbiotics and perhaps I'll even ask them to watch Earthlings (which I hope all of you have watched by now). But even if they just stop eating grain-fed beef, that's a huge victory IMO.
                      • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                        Sat, October 31, 2009 - 8:40 PM
                        <...so I remain pessimistic about the supposed messianic properties of any of them,
                        the sweet words & promises,
                        whether pop stars or presidents. >

                        thing is Ramon, you always lay all the responsiblity on "the elites" and true they have power, but what for example do you think the American voters reaction would be to Obama, if right now he suggested to transfer say 20% of GDP wealth to the poor and starving in the world.

                        Jeffry Sachs, who's worked a fair amount with Bono, has suggested on very knowledgeable estimates and his expereience with the millenium villages he set up in Africa, a wealth transfer of 0.7% GDP of the developed nations would erradicate extreme poverty over around 10-20 years if effectivly invested. America fall very short on there commitment to do that (which all developed nations committed to in 2001) and only give 0.27%.

                        But i would guess you would think even Sachs target of 0.7% would be inadequate. I would guess you would argue for at least 20% if not more right ? And because that isn't done, your going to lay all the blame for that on "the elites".

                        But again i ask, what you think the reaction would be if Obama now committed publicly to giving 20% of Americas wealth to the poor and starving in Africa.

                        Well, for an answer to that lets look at the opposition Obama has been getting to health care for all in Americas. A far far far less radical programme of wealth distribution, which transfers some wealth to some of the poorest in America, not even outside the country.

                        Well the people - a good proportion of them, have been going mad.

                        Fact is if Obama done some of the radical things you want, the public at large would lynch him. He would be kicked and booed out of office Ramon - bit time. You need to wise up to the public around you, publics that to some extent do drive which "elites" are in power.

                        So why dont you place some of this responsibility on some of the public Ramon, who would complain to there leaders if they let the world work in a more fair way.

                        Why do you let the public off the hook, and blame it all on the leaders who they vote in ?

                        After all we have seen some more radical leaders on the political stage, and they dont tend to get very far with the public.

                        Its really convenient to focus your blame for society being often times selfish on an "elite" some wicked bad guys at the top who wield power, but when you take a long cold look at reality, you realise its people.

                        Neither just the public OR the elites, but both. Its people. Some people are selfish, some are kind, its always been that way.

                        But what is changing, and what makes me optimistic though Ramon isnt Astrology, its a knowledge that that selfishness of society is diminishing as we evolve. Not as fast as id like, and im trying to do my bit to accelerate it, but to blame it all on an elite misses the problem.

                        But it is getting better. In 1914 when they declared war against Germany, a war in which many millions would die, there were celebrations on the streets of England. Back then, thoughts of helping poor starving people in poor countries of different race would have been greeted as a form on lunacy. Instead people wanted to enslave them to serve the powerful nations - and people thought that was right - might is right. Over 100 years ago, the working class were not even allowed the vote, never mind social justice.

                        So we have developed a lot since then. But not as far as we need to go to make the world work well.

                        But i see change coming, and astrology and 2012 is not a belief in an artificial conspiratorial enemy, is a knowledge that our evolution is affected to some extent by cosmic rhythms, rhythms that took thousands of years to observer and work out. Ignore them if you like, but I and others see patterns in them.

                        And clear patterns in the way society evolves, and distortions in how society evolves too.
                      • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                        Sat, October 31, 2009 - 8:43 PM
                        <...so I remain pessimistic about the supposed messianic properties of any of them,
                        the sweet words & promises,
                        whether pop stars or presidents. >

                        thing is Ramon, you always lay all the responsiblity on "the elites" and true they have power, but what for example do you think the American voters reaction would be to Obama, if right now he suggested to transfer say 20% of GDP wealth to the poor and starving in the world.

                        Jeffry Sachs, who's worked a fair amount with Bono, has suggested on very knowledgeable estimates and his expereience with the millenium villages he set up in Africa, a wealth transfer of 0.7% GDP of the developed nations would erradicate extreme poverty over around 10-20 years if effectivly invested. America fall very short on there commitment to do that (which all developed nations committed to in 2001) and only give 0.27%.

                        But i would guess you would think even Sachs target of 0.7% would be inadequate. I would guess you would argue for at least 20% if not more right ? And because that isn't done, your going to lay all the blame for that on "the elites".

                        But again i ask, what you think the reaction would be if Obama now committed publicly to giving 20% of Americas wealth to the poor and starving in Africa.

                        Well, for an answer to that lets look at the opposition Obama has been getting to health care for all in Americas. A far far far less radical programme of wealth distribution, which transfers some wealth to some of the poorest in America, not even outside the country.

                        Well the people - a good proportion of them, have been going mad.

                        Fact is if Obama done some of the radical things you want, the public at large would lynch him. He would be kicked and booed out of office Ramon - bit time. You need to wise up to the public around you, publics that to some extent do drive which "elites" are in power.

                        So why dont you place some of this responsibility on some of the public Ramon, who would complain to there leaders if they let the world work in a more fair way.

                        Why do you let the public off the hook, and blame it all on the leaders who they vote in ?

                        After all we have seen some more radical leaders on the political stage, and they dont tend to get very far with the public.

                        Its really convenient to focus your blame for society being often times selfish on an "elite" some wicked bad guys at the top who wield power, but when you take a long cold look at reality, you realise its people.

                        Neither just the public OR the elites, but both. Its people. Some people are selfish, some are kind, its always been that way.

                        But what is changing, and what makes me optimistic though Ramon isnt Astrology, its a knowledge that that selfishness of society is diminishing as we evolve. Not as fast as id like, and im trying to do my bit to accelerate it, but to blame it all on an elite misses the problem.

                        But it is getting better. In 1914 when they declared war against Germany, a war in which many millions would die, there were celebrations on the streets of England. Back then, thoughts of helping poor starving people in poor countries of different race would have been greeted as a form on lunacy. Instead people wanted to enslave them to serve the powerful nations - and people thought that was right - might is right. Over 100 years ago, the working class were not even allowed the vote, never mind social justice.

                        So we have developed a lot since then. But not as far as we need to go to make the world work well.

                        But i see change coming, and astrology and 2012 is not a belief in an artificial conspiratorial enemy, is a knowledge that our evolution is affected to some extent by cosmic rhythms, rhythms that took thousands of years to observer and work out. Ignore them if you like, but I and others see patterns in them.

                        And clear patterns in the way society evolves, and distortions in how society evolves too.
                      • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                        Sat, October 31, 2009 - 8:44 PM
                        <...so I remain pessimistic about the supposed messianic properties of any of them,
                        the sweet words & promises,
                        whether pop stars or presidents. >

                        thing is Ramon, you always lay all the responsiblity on "the elites" and true they have power, but what for example do you think the American voters reaction would be to Obama, if right now he suggested to transfer say 20% of GDP wealth to the poor and starving in the world.

                        Jeffry Sachs, who's worked a fair amount with Bono, has suggested on very knowledgeable estimates and his expereience with the millenium villages he set up in Africa, a wealth transfer of 0.7% GDP of the developed nations would erradicate extreme poverty over around 10-20 years if effectivly invested. America fall very short on there commitment to do that (which all developed nations committed to in 2001) and only give 0.27%.

                        But i would guess you would think even Sachs target of 0.7% would be inadequate. I would guess you would argue for at least 20% if not more right ? And because that isn't done, your going to lay all the blame for that on "the elites".

                        But again i ask, what you think the reaction would be if Obama now committed publicly to giving 20% of Americas wealth to the poor and starving in Africa.

                        Well, for an answer to that lets look at the opposition Obama has been getting to health care for all in Americas. A far far far less radical programme of wealth distribution, which transfers some wealth to some of the poorest in America, not even outside the country.

                        Well the people - a good proportion of them, have been going mad.

                        Fact is if Obama done some of the radical things you want, the public at large would lynch him. He would be kicked and booed out of office Ramon - bit time. You need to wise up to the public around you, publics that to some extent do drive which "elites" are in power.

                        So why dont you place some of this responsibility on some of the public Ramon, who would complain to there leaders if they let the world work in a more fair way.

                        Why do you let the public off the hook, and blame it all on the leaders who they vote in ?

                        After all we have seen some more radical leaders on the political stage, and they dont tend to get very far with the public.

                        Its really convenient to focus your blame for society being often times selfish on an "elite" some wicked bad guys at the top who wield power, but when you take a long cold look at reality, you realise its people.

                        Neither just the public OR the elites, but both. Its people. Some people are selfish, some are kind, its always been that way.

                        But what is changing, and what makes me optimistic though Ramon isnt Astrology, its a knowledge that that selfishness of society is diminishing as we evolve. Not as fast as id like, and im trying to do my bit to accelerate it, but to blame it all on an elite misses the problem.

                        But it is getting better. In 1914 when they declared war against Germany, a war in which many millions would die, there were celebrations on the streets of England. Back then, thoughts of helping poor starving people in poor countries of different race would have been greeted as a form on lunacy. Instead people wanted to enslave them to serve the powerful nations - and people thought that was right - might is right. Over 100 years ago, the working class were not even allowed the vote, never mind social justice.

                        So we have developed a lot since then. But not as far as we need to go to make the world work well.

                        But i see change coming, and astrology and 2012 is not a belief in an artificial conspiratorial enemy, is a knowledge that our evolution is affected to some extent by cosmic rhythms, rhythms that took thousands of years to observer and work out. Ignore them if you like, but I and others see patterns in them.

                        And clear patterns in the way society evolves, and distortions in how society evolves too.
                        • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                          Sun, November 1, 2009 - 1:19 AM
                          opps, post didnt show up at first, sorry about the multiple post.
                          • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                            Sun, November 1, 2009 - 2:38 AM
                            interesting article on leading commentators around the world making judgement on Obamas first 9 months -

                            www.guardian.co.uk/commenti...ack-obama
                            • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                              Sun, November 1, 2009 - 3:30 AM
                              How many Nobel peace prizes are given out each year? And arer there different kinds? I dont know that much about it really. I have heard of some scientists and an author winning recently. Al Gore. He's not the author I mean though. I forget the guys name and the name of his book. He sounded interesting but the book didnt get the best reviews. But then reviews dont mean a whole lot to me. I figure if he one a nobel prize for it it must have some redeeming quality.
                              • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                                Sun, November 1, 2009 - 4:04 AM
                                I could be wrong, but i think there is one each in each field -physics, chemistry, physiology or medicine, and literature, and economics as well as a general one like the one that was given to Obama, as a recognition to global peace.

                                something that relates to the conversation above with Ramon, in terms of why im optimistic about the future -

                                < In fact, our ancestors were far more violent than we are today. Indeed, violence has been in decline over long stretches of history, and today we are probably living in the most peaceful moment of our species' time on earth.

                                A history of violence

                                In the decade of Darfur and Iraq, that statement might seem hallucinatory or even obscene. But if we consider the evidence, we find that the decline of violence is a fractal phenomenon: We can see the decline over millennia, centuries, decades, and years. When the archeologist Lawrence Keeley examined casualty rates among contemporary hunter-gatherers—which is the best picture we have of how people might have lived 10,000 years ago—he discovered that the likelihood that a man would die at the hands of another man ranged from a high of 60 percent in one tribe to 15 percent at the most peaceable end. In contrast, the chance that a European or American man would be killed by another man was less than one percent during the 20th century, a period of time that includes both world wars. If the death rate of tribal warfare had prevailed in the 20th century, there would have been two billion deaths rather than 100 million, horrible as that is.


                                greatergood.berkeley.edu/great...54.php

                                >

                                id be very curious if Hoopes has any knowledge of this kind of thing, or of Lawrence Keeley ? Though i know academia can be highly specialised.

                                Anyway its very right that we have higher expectations of how our society should work, but the idea that monolithic elite power is driving the world more and more into violence and poverty is just not true.

                                Parts of Africa have certainly come out bad in terms of how they fit into the expanding global economics, but overall the world is better off now than it ever has been. Its very easy to be nostalgic about the past, and I say that as a person who IS nostalgic about the past !

                                The main reason I'm so optimistic, aside from a belief that the Mayans PROBABLY had it right that 2012 is a turning point in history - though i think were probably looking at about 30 years in and 30 years out of that corner, longer to see the full impacts, is the fact that things like the internet are going to greatly accelerate the sought of changes that the article above talks about.

                                Much of the developing world has only started getting connected now, and the impact of the internet on change will be a key part i think of changes that are already taken place.

                                Fact is as much as we all want a better world, the world has already got MUCH less violent, and MUCH less poverty stricken, with MUCH less disease than our ancestors knew.

                                Nature can in some ways be tough. The more we recognise its in our grasp to make our world even better than it is today, the more we will.

                                • Mon
                                  Mon
                                  offline 7

                                  Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                                  Sun, November 1, 2009 - 9:46 AM
                                  pp: "...but the idea that monolithic elite power is driving the world more and more into violence and poverty is just not true. ..."

                                  >>> Where did I say anything like this? Don't put words in my mouth please.

                                  I believe, that if given the chance, we would pretty much eradicate war & violence & oppression all together, save for some nutcases here and there. I don't believe that humans are inherently evil or good, but I do believe that it is in one's own best interest to care for everyone's interest.

                                  Sure, things get a little better every year, but that's no excuse to still have wars and famines, or to have delusions about our 'democratic' system. We are still slaves to the corporate elites, with different degrees of freedom and different styles of cages.

                                  I too believe the internet has increased awareness of global brotherhood and awareness of our overal reality. That's why you are seeing changes; it is the elites being scared to death of our increasing self-relianxce and awareness, and them throwing us more bones like black presidents and environmental campaigns.

                                  Their control is slipping away and we are seeing their last desperate attempts to stay afloat.

                                  pp: "..Fact is as much as we all want a better world, the world has already got MUCH less violent, and MUCH less poverty stricken, with MUCH less disease than our ancestors knew...."

                                  >>> Easy for you to say, go preach that in Gaza and see what the response will be.

                                  pp: "..Fact is if Obama done some of the radical things you want, the public at large would lynch him. He would be kicked and booed out of office Ramon - bit time. You need to wise up to the public around you, publics that to some extent do drive which "elites" are in power...."

                                  >>> Who controls education, healthcare, the mainstream media? Who owns the homes we have to work our entire lives for?

                                  You need to wise up to the deliberate suppression of awareness the masses are subject to.

                                  pp: "...So why dont you place some of this responsibility on some of the public Ramon, who would complain to there leaders if they let the world work in a more fair way...."

                                  >>> SOme of these leaders have literally millions of people hanging on their lips, swallowing everything they preach hook. line and sinker. I just wish they had more sincerity and a more powerfull message rather than seeking change through the machine that itself is the issue. Drastic problems need drastic measures imo.

                                  pp: "...The main reason I'm so optimistic, aside from a belief that the Mayans PROBABLY had it right that 2012 is a turning point in history..."

                                  >>> Check this out: 2012.tribe.net/thread/57d...e447abcf078
                                  • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                                    Sun, November 1, 2009 - 1:34 PM
                                    <You need to wise up to the deliberate suppression of awareness the masses are subject to. >

                                    Oh I'm onto that in more ways than you probably realise, and we actuly agree on more than we probably both realise, but somethings not.

                                    Head is a bit stoned right now, but im going to come back to some of your points tommorow, this is a very interesting area for me.

                                    PS with Gaza, you should remember at the time (Hoopes may remind you if you have forgoten) that there was nobdoy going more mad about that than me, maybe in part down to my half Turkish roots.

                                    But look at the hard cold stats, 10,000 year ago 60% of the world, which would be around 3.7 billion in one generation, would have died that way.

                                    Of course we should want more, a complete end to this kind of thing, and a complete end to extreme poverty, we just disagree on how to get there. Ill come back to your points tomorrow, but a question for you to think about in the meantime, are you just as against the violence that the Taliban for example, and some Africans in Darfur and Somalia inflict, as the violence in Gaza ? And what ideas do you have to end THAT kind of violence ? I am concerned about state produced, and western state produced violence too.

                                    But you did ask me why im optomistic didnt you ? I think the history of mankind speaks for itself if you project it onto the future, and then if you accept my argument that all that can accelerate through the net.

                                    But im with you on lots of things, particuarly the potnetional of the media to raise awarness, stimulate, offer soultions and most importantly crystalise action - though you didnt exactly put it that way !

                                    I'll go through your points tomorrow. As much as we are polarised on quite a bit, i do like to think i learn from people.
                                    • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                                      Sun, November 1, 2009 - 1:39 PM
                                      and by the way with Astrology Ramon im also interested by such things and the 2004 -2012 venus eclipse, and the coming Pluto Uranus square thats just starting and will last 6-7 years.

                                      I look at 2012 as the birds eye view, giving a vast zoomed out picture of a very big cycle, and conventional astrology as puting some meat on them Mayan bones !

                                      but im going to read through that thread, some interesting posts coming up in this tribe sometimes again. It makes a welcome change sometimes from all the time ive been spending in hard nosed and fact/logic based Politics tribe.
                                    • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                                      Sun, November 1, 2009 - 2:51 PM
                                      "You need to wise up to the deliberate suppression of awareness the masses are subject to"

                                      Right. Certainly you don't think people bear personal responsibility for the stupid stuff they consume on tv and tabloids and fast food resturants. They are not responsible for their acute lack of interest in almost anything except their own gratification from an early age. Why i remember that in public school from the very start, almost all of the students had had their awareness deliberately supressed to the point where they weren't intellectually curious about hardly anything. I think they all would have chosen heavy thinking and public tv if they had not been so suppressed. Likewise the near deafening clamor for fresh fruits and vegetables instead of candy and grease was met with more supression. Just damn those elites. All their fault.
                                      • Mon
                                        Mon
                                        offline 7

                                        Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                                        Sun, November 1, 2009 - 7:45 PM
                                        pp: "...Right. Certainly you don't think people bear personal responsibility..."

                                        >>> Right. Certainly humans don't have to work 40 hrs per week to have a home and food for their family, they have everything they need in order to be good parents, eat healthy and enable their children to flourish in an excellent education system that allows children to explore their own creativity and curiosity with full support of teachers who truly love their profession. They always get clear cut answers as to the risk of certain products, the reason for certain wars or budget cuts, and surely they can trust the government to be transparent and honest, as well as on the side of the poor, sick or disabled. Surely everyone has always had equal opportunity regardless of skin color, class, creed or sex. Surely big business has the environment and well being of humanity closest to heart, and profit comes second, and this has been especially evident in the major media corporations who always report with the utmost sincerity and objectivity. And of course, no inspirational voice of awareness, insight, knowledge or wisdom has ever been silenced or censored, so we've always been exposed to these excellent sources of information and perspectives. All this has been encouraged by those atop the social, religious and political hierarchies, whose carefully chosen decisions affect us all simply due to the workings of hierarchical power and control. Luckily, only the most caring and loving people make it to those positions.
                                    • Mon
                                      Mon
                                      offline 7

                                      Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                                      Sun, November 1, 2009 - 7:30 PM
                                      pp: "...But a question for you to think about in the meantime, are you just as against the violence that the Taliban for example, and some Africans in Darfur and Somalia inflict, as the violence in Gaza ?..."

                                      >>> Of course I am, but this thread is about Obama's peace prize and so I highlight some of his war supporting behaviors. This whole Obama thing is unfolding exactly how many have foretold: nothing really changes, the rich get richer and the poor suffer; we get thrown a couple more bones, and the killing, famines, wars and profiteering continues. He is simply filling in a position within the ranks of the system, and will therefore maintain the system and try to improve it. Sure, humanity apparently isn't ready for an alternate system, but why glorify the folks running the dog and pony show? It's as if all people are willing to do is cast a vote and then let others fix the issues for the next 4 years.

                                      An entire grassroots campaign to get Obama into office, and now most people sit back and expect things to get better, while he supports Israeli war crimes and continues to send disproportionate aid to that area... Every day families struggle to feed their kids while big corp is raking it in by the millions. Sure humanity will continue to evolve, but should we just sit back or should we consciously aid the process?
                                      I think there's no time to watch and pray and to ask the starving poor to have patience for natural evolution to run it's course. Simply because of the extreme wealth of a few.
                                      • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                                        Mon, November 2, 2009 - 1:37 AM
                                        I think both of you are right, both Wil and you also Ramon.

                                        Wil is right that people must take up there own responsibility in there lives as much as blaming it all on government.

                                        As much as there is a lot of rubbish in the media now because a lot of it been bought up, there is probably more choice avilable than any other time, not least the internet.

                                        You can find any way of looking at ANY issue on the net within seconds, from fox news to real news, democracy,now, to some triped out alternative perspective.

                                        And i think its VERY simplistic to blame all the woes such as wars, wealth distribution, etc on a corrupt and evil elite. After all we DO have a democracy of a kind. As Wil says, if everyone educated themselves on the choices - and certainly in a realtivly wealthy country like America, they are free to do that on say the internet, they could vote for any candidate they wanted to. To some extent, we get the government we want, only to some extent, sure the mass media do corrupt, i wouldnt deny that, but as Wil says, your giving all the power to "THEM", we have more power than you claim. Certainly in compassion to say China of 1970 for example, or Germany of 1940. Or even England of 1400, or most other times in history for the history of humanity certainly for about the last 2000 years.

                                        But i think Ramon is right in that unless we DEMAND more from society, collectively, then society wont deliver.

                                        Its good to have high expectations, to demand a better society. And certainly i think the world works too much in terms of winners and losers now, especially on the level of nations. There is too much difference between how people live in Ethopia, and how they live in England.

                                        But at the same time I think we have never been closer as we are not to solutions to them things.

                                        This is because despite the fact that a good proportion of the media HAS been bought and sold like its candy, its all breaking up and changing at the same time, as i say, never been so much choice.

                                        I think your both right and wrong Ramon.

                                        Obama is just a start. You say there has been no change - on that I think your wrong, there have been some change. For a start, take Russia. Bush and McPalin would have been worse, was building to a war with Russia.

                                        You know in Ossteria the Russians had said if America had put in conventional troops they were going to use nuclear, because Russia dont have as strong conventional forces as America. And they were fed up with the American agression of the last 8 years of Bush.

                                        So unless a nuclear world war doesnt concern you, thats certainly change, as Obama now has good realtions with Russia.

                                        But on a lot of things like Afganistan and Iraq there is change. These wars have developed over not even the last 10 years, but even with Afganistan in some ways the last 30 years.

                                        To expect Obama to fix it all magicaly in 9 months is naive i think. Im sure you would say why cant he just pull out.

                                        Well, thats why I asked you about Taliban violence Ramon. Because you seem to resent American violence more than theres. If Obama does decide to pull out of Afganistan (and remember again its certainly not a war of HIS making) there may infact be a bloodbath develop in Afganistan.

                                        Does that not concern or worry you ? Personaly, like Obama, Im really not entirely sure whats best to do about Afganistan. If youd ask me in 2006 when 67% of Afgahanis wanted the Americans there to protect them from the Taliban (who only 13% supported) then id have said they should stay.

                                        But now the support has just about halfed, and that makes a big difference. Obama is said to be very deep in thought about what to do and is certainly not taking the decision lightly.

                                        If it was your decison Rmaon, and you pulled all the troups, and the violence over say the next 3 years there got far worse, and lets pretend im afganistan, and you pulled the troops, and in 6 months time, lets say my wife and children were murdered by the Taliban, and i said to you im really angry with America, for being this irresponsible, they have left us to the mercy of the Taliban, what would you say to me ?

                                        Its not an easy decision. You might be right its best to pull out, but you may be wrong. If you pretend its an easy decision for Obama, then your either being naive, or unrealistic.

                                        Im all for expecting more from society, but just wanting peace, and just wanting prosperity Ramon isnt enough, if YOU were one of the elite leaders you dont like, YOU'd then have to offer Solutions.

                                        So, tell me now, what's your solution to the Taliban ? Not so easy when you have the driving wheel is it ?

                                        This is my point to you.

                                        Its good to demand peace and prosperity for all. Im with you on that. And its OK to point out more leaders could do - But its wrong to imply there easy to deliver. And as Wil says, YOU yourself have to take some responsibility in understanding there hard to deliver.
                                        • Mon
                                          Mon
                                          offline 7

                                          Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                                          Tue, November 3, 2009 - 9:37 AM
                                          Wil, you don't know what I do in everyday life so why say that I dodge responsibility?

                                          If we wish to see some real change in the world we have to address the parasites; they are not an illusion.
                                          But, they go about unmentioned by the world's leaders and popstars who ask us to be patient.
                                          Instead of addressing the root cause of most of our problems, Obama asks us all to do some volunteer work... on top of our 40+ hour jobs, whether we got laid off or not. Or perhaps he'll ask us to go fight for Haliburton in Afghanistan?

                                          What a joke.... time to start knocking on some dynasty super-rich' doors and get some freaking funding for drastic changes, instead of bending over for them on an hourly basis.

                                          video.google.com/videoplay
                                          • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                                            Tue, November 3, 2009 - 10:06 AM
                                            I mean you are dodging responsibility in concept.

                                            I think obama's asking for volunteers is very good. Not everyone has a 40 hour a week job. It's through helping each other that we'll get further, not expecting handout or handup even from big daddy government or any other big daddy god substitute.

                                            I think you are being totally nitpicky in your criticisms of obama.
                                            • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                                              Tue, November 3, 2009 - 11:21 AM
                                              <What a joke.... time to start knocking on some dynasty super-rich' doors and get some freaking funding for drastic changes, instead of bending over for them on an hourly basis. >

                                              Ramon, whilst i would agree for example there should be higher tax on the very wealthy - which incidently Obama is bringing in, because he is leting the tax break for the rich that Bush put in expire i think its this year or next, i think its extermely simplistic to call all the rich parasites.

                                              Particularly actuly in a country like America where there are lots of opportunities for people to do well.

                                              Take George Soros for example. You'd call him a parasite right ? But the fact is when he was escaping the communist and fascists from Hungry, he turned up in London peniless.

                                              He made all his money himself, and now he gives a lot of it away to good causes. He himself argues for higher taxes against the rich.

                                              Take Bill Gates, an even better example than Soros, because he has given ALL his money away, he made his fortune himself, and has now donated ALL of it to wiping out diseases and poverty in Africa. And, in part, he is succeeding, he has already eradicated one killer disease in Africa saving 100,000 thousands of lives.

                                              Can you tell me one signle anarchist ANYWHERE anytime in history who has done more to help the poor than that, than what Bill Gates has done with his money, money i can tell you that he would have sweated blood sometimes to make, as someone who used to run my own business myself, i can gurantee you Gates would have certainly have sweated blood to make that money - money which he has given all away to those who MOST need it.

                                              Now i call that puting $30 billion of good hard earned money to good use, wouldnt you ?

                                              Take Warren Buffet. He has given all his fortune to Bill Gates too to help poverty in Africa. Buffet made it all himself too, it did not come from some rich dynasty.

                                              Fact is Ramon all the opportunites avilable to Soros, Buffet, and Gates, are available to you also. How can you call them parasites when they made this money themselves, through hard work, luck and intelligence ? You want that kind of money yourself, well, why dont you try to make it like they did ?

                                              I do think things are too slanted towards the rich in America. I agree with you there. I don't totally disagree with you. But you go too far. Not everyone who has done well is a parasite.

                                              And not everyone who is poor is a great citerzen either, that's for sure. Sure the rules need to be changed, higher tax for the wealthy. But then again to some extent its in societies interests to reward hard work, intelligence and enterprise.

                                              Its a question of balance. And just as Bush had the balance all wrong in favour of the rich, i suggest you have the balance wrong aginst those who do well.

                                              There shouldn't be such a big difference between the winners and the losers as there is. But if you call all people who "win" the game parasites just because they win, then not only is that unjust, its very much the politics of envy as its termed now in the UK.

                                              To tell anybody who does well that there a parasites is going to kill peoples motivation to try and do well in life. Do we really want a whole world of people with no motivation to try and do well ? Work hard, learn stuff, invent stuff, be creative in a way that society rewards ? You do that, your going to kill the dynamisim in man, much as happened in the USSR actually.

                                              Again i think its a question of balance. Sure there is too big a gap between rich and poor in America, but to argue for no difference is silly and unrealistic.

                                              And you cant blame everything about the way America works on Obama either. Look - he tried to bring in health reform to give health care to all, and look at the shit hes geting for that. Cant you see that its not all about this one man, that your fellow Americans to some extent dictate the society they live in.

                                              I agree though the commercial media that's owned by big business in America does sway influence a lot of people negativitily in America, but that is changing now because of digital technology, and if i have my way its going to change an awful lot more, and beside i think you exaggerate the problem to some extent.

                                              I completely agree that there is MUCH more needs to be done to reform the financial markets. Son Kappor has some great ideas on that. But i know whilst i agree with you on the need, id disagree with your ideas on them, which would probably be to eradicate them completely.

                                              Its perhaps understandable the way you feel though, with what has just happened with the Credit Crunch, and wealth distribution is as it is in America.
                                              • Mon
                                                Mon
                                                offline 7

                                                Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                                                Tue, November 3, 2009 - 11:54 AM
                                                pp: "...How can you call them parasites when they made this money themselves, through hard work, luck and intelligence ? ..."

                                                >>> I was talking about dynasties, but yes, with 11 billion to his name, I don't think very highly of Soros and his ilk. Watch that super rich docu I posted below if you want to know why.
                                                • Mon
                                                  Mon
                                                  offline 7

                                                  Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                                                  Tue, November 3, 2009 - 12:38 PM
                                                  Elo, these things are all relative imo. Some people can donate a couple billions and not feel it while others need to think really hard between getting a much needed medical treatment or feeding their kids. I don't think it's fair to say that donating a million is better than donating old clothes to Goodwill.
                                                  • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                                                    Tue, November 3, 2009 - 1:20 PM
                                                    <Elo, these things are all relative imo. Some people can donate a couple billions and not feel it while others need to think really hard between getting a much needed medical treatment or feeding their kids. I don't think it's fair to say that donating a million is better than donating old clothes to Goodwill. >

                                                    True, I agree with that.

                                                    I agree there should be LESS difference between the rich and poor, of course i do. In fact youd find Soros for one absoutly agrees with that, he wants the rules changed.

                                                    Thats the point, you cant say "there ilk" as if there all the same people, some of them are complete wankers, completly agree with that. But you have differenatiate between the good and the bad.

                                                    Again i can ask you about countries like Sweeden, Germany, France.

                                                    They get good health care, decent working condtions, and benifits enought to be comfortable on if they lose there jobs.

                                                    Yet if you work hard, your clever, and you show inititive, your rewarded more.

                                                    Tell me why that isnt fair ?

                                                    Forget America for a moment, and Africa, and China, i agree they dont work fair, but answer me about Sweden, Germany and France.

                                                    The point being, Sweden Germany and France have a capatilist system that improves life generaly for all there people, you only have to look at them countries 100 years ago to see how the material quality of life for the people in them countries has improved.

                                                    Dont tell me its not fair that some people in Germany, Sweden and France are more wealthy, because people in them countries have the chance to do well, they can get funding to go to University, and they can try hard, and do well.

                                                    I do agree that society should be a bit less materialistic and focus more on things like culture, art, spirituality, time out, nature, but that's another argument.
                                                • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                                                  Tue, November 3, 2009 - 12:46 PM
                                                  I got nothing much good to say about extreme accumulation of wealth or the screwed up societal values that lead to people trying to accumulate wealth as if it is a sport while others are in such need. Sure looks like parasitism to me. A lot of what the wealthy choose to do with their money is against the good of society. Gates did not sweat blood for his money. A guy pulling down near minimum wage working hard labor trying to support a family, he sweats blood for his money.
                                                  • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                                                    Tue, November 3, 2009 - 1:13 PM
                                                    <A lot of what the wealthy choose to do with their money is against the good of society. Gates did not sweat blood for his money.>

                                                    How can you say that Gates $30 billion has been used aginst the good of soceity ? its saved countless thousands of lives already -

                                                    <The Living Proof Project will show that U.S-supported initiatives to fight malaria, AIDS, and other diseases are saving and improving the lives of millions of people in poor and developing countries – and as a result, empowering them to lead more productive lives. The campaign kicked off today with a new web site (www.livingproofproject.org) and advertisements in Washington, DC that highlight compelling success stories in global health.

                                                    “We want to show Americans that their investments in global health are working,” said Bill Gates, co-chair of the Gates Foundation. “We should all be proud that U.S.-funded health programs are saving millions of lives and bringing new hope to poor and developing countries.”

                                                    U.S. support for global health programs has increased significantly in recent years with the launch of the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) and other initiatives. In just five years, PEPFAR has helped save an estimated 1.2 million lives by expanding access to HIV prevention and treatment.

                                                    “Bill and I are convinced that American funding for global health is working, because we have witnessed the results first-hand,” said Melinda Gates, co-chair of the Gates Foundation. “We think if more Americans learn about progress in global health, they’ll be inspired to maintain these investments—even in difficult economic times—so that we can do even more.”>

                                                    and how can you say the Gates didnt sweat blood for his money ? How would you know that, because he got rich ?

                                                    I dont know a great deal about his life, but i wager he worked very long hours indeed to get that kind of success.

                                                    Whats important though isnt his success, but what he done with it. How many lives have you, me, and Ramon saved Wil ? Id wager you not as many as Gates has, with his money.

                                                    Doesn't that matter, saving lives ?

                                                    Still, im all for the wealthy being taxed more, so actually, are some of the people i have mentioned. But im not for trying to take out the incentive for people trying to archive things.
                                                    • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                                                      Tue, November 3, 2009 - 1:40 PM
                                                      "How can you say that Gates $30 billion has been used aginst the good of soceity ? its saved countless thousands of lives already - "

                                                      Well, for one thing some of microsoft's practices have clearly been unfair, especialy in its early days it was avaricious and not a team player. Gates has chosen bigger bucks ahead of utility to users and society a lot in his business. But i am more talking about all the golf course and banquets and air travel. Frankly, most rich people i know are clueless about the hardships that most working people face, and keep themselves ignorant of it on purpose.

                                                      The wealthy in america do not pay their fair share of taxes, elo. Many pay no tax at all because our tax code has been tweaked to their benefit with loopholes plenty. But working guys pay taxes up front.
                                                      • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                                                        Tue, November 3, 2009 - 2:07 PM
                                                        <The wealthy in america do not pay their fair share of taxes, elo. Many pay no tax at all because our tax code has been tweaked to their benefit with loopholes plenty. But working guys pay taxes up front.>

                                                        yes thats true. I do take your objections more now.

                                                        But as i say below, how far would you want to go on that ? Like how much forced wealth distribution is fair ? Do we go as far as China in the 1950's and 60's ? Or just as far as say Sweden ?

                                                        and dont forget, in a democracy, you have to get the majority to agree.

                                                        For sure though id agree bigger taxes for the Rich. I know actually Soros himself argues for that.
                                                    • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                                                      Tue, November 3, 2009 - 6:01 PM
                                                      "Yet if you work hard, your clever, and you show inititive, your rewarded more."

                                                      That was a good marketing tactic in the '50s.
                                                      I work hard, I'm very clever, I always show initiative, and I'm exploited by the folks higher on the ladder.

                                                      You make it sound like the wealthy "give" their money to charitable causes out of the goodness of their heart.

                                                      It's a fucking tax right off so they don't get nailed for having "too much money"! That's how they get to keep the perverse amounts they posess.
                                                      The truly "good" people I know are generally broke 'cuz of the unwillingness to exploit the environment and their fellow humans for a buck.

                                                      Why don't any of your amazing wealthy elites "give" their money to the American educational systems, as just one example, so our people actually have the abillity to make progressive choices for humanity?
                                                      They don't want the competition.
                                                      What would happen to the Rancher if his cows wised up?
                                                      Anyone owning 3 20,000 sq. ft. homes is a rapist.
                                                      • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                                                        Wed, November 4, 2009 - 12:37 AM
                                                        <That was a good marketing tactic in the '50s.
                                                        I work hard, I'm very clever, I always show initiative, and I'm exploited by the folks higher on the ladder. >

                                                        get another job then. ever thought about that ?

                                                        Your trying to tell me that everyone who is clever, works hard, and shows initiative is exploited ? That every job is exploitative ?

                                                        Bullshit. I know people who have come from very humble origins, like a friend of mine who grew up in poor government housing in glasgow, in one of the poorest parts of scoltand, with a single mum, and does very well now.

                                                        <Why don't any of your amazing wealthy elites "give" their money to the American educational systems, as just one example>

                                                        sure I think in America taxes for the wealthy should be raised and some of that money should go into the education system.


                                                        And actuly, Bill Gates already does that. And its bullshit what you say about the tax breaks when you aply it to him. He has given away the vast majority of his fortune of $30 billion.

                                                        If he kept onto that, some of it would have been taxed, but some of it he would have kept, but now he doesn't have any of it.

                                                        There are major problems with wealth distribution in America, but some of you go too extreme in your solutions.

                                                        As i say countries like Sweden, Japan, Norway, Denmark, Germany, France work quiet fairly.

                                                        The biggest problem is financial market reform now, that needs to urgently be regulated and its just not happening yet. The suck lots of money out of the real economy, and that is a big problem.

                                                        If you talk about that, i agree.
                                                        • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                                                          Wed, November 4, 2009 - 4:20 AM
                                                          Elo, this is anything but a level playing field here. Rags to riches success stories of a very few are publicized and projected as some sort of norm which they most certainly are not. Like a carrot dangled in front of a starving ox. Those who have money making more money for them do quite well. They have lots of investments in funds that do bad things for them so they do not have to sully their own hands. Those who sully their hands growing food or building homes do not, in my opinion, get a fair share of the wealth they help create. The system is geared towards corporate welfare and not the welfare of workers. Republicans have successfully harnessed america's racial prejudice, hate and fear to pull the wagon of the privileged few.
                                                • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                                                  Tue, November 3, 2009 - 1:15 PM
                                                  "How can you call them parasites when they made this money themselves, through hard work, luck and intelligence ? ..."

                                                  Most people i know with much money inherited it. A lot of this i know to ultimately be from sources tainted by greed and a willingness to sell out the environment and take unfair advantage of less wealthy people by means of their wealth and power.
                                                  • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                                                    Tue, November 3, 2009 - 1:32 PM
                                                    <Most people i know with much money inherited it. A lot of this i know to ultimately be from sources tainted by greed and a willingness to sell out the environment and take unfair advantage of less wealthy people by means of their wealth and power.>

                                                    Ok, i can see that perhaps, maybe im taking a few exceptions like Gates and Warren Buffet, Soros, and painting a picture of them as the norm. Sure a lot of wealth, particularly in America, isnt neccesiarly good for society.

                                                    I'm all for better wealth distribution. And as i said before, maybe im partly coloured by the fact that this isn't as big a problem in Europe, as it is elsewhere, though the UK it aint perfect either.

                                                    But the question is Wil, how far do you go ?

                                                    There is a bad side to people grasping for more wealth, for sure. But there is also a good side.

                                                    People wanting to produce more easier, is what has made farming much more productive over thousands of years. Thats helped stop people dieing of famine. Do you know how many millions and millions died of famines in China over the last few hundred years ?

                                                    Striving for more materially has helped people be more comfortable.

                                                    To me its a balance. I think there needs to be better wealth distribution, but if you go too far, like communism, then you kill people incentives and you stop society being dynamic. The USSR collapsed and China turned capitalist.

                                                    Sure, now we have a big problem with the environment. But you have to be fair. Its only in the last 20 -30 years that much of that has been common accepted knowledge, still now some dont even accept it, just check out the climate change thread here to see that.

                                                    Yet man has striven for material improvent for thousands of years. Its gonig to take a bit time, certainly more than 20 years, to make the enrormous shift neccesary.

                                                    But i see no reason why in say 100 years, when im absoulty sure we will have worked out how to feed ourselves well, to be materialy well off, yet work in perfect harmony with the environment, i see no reason why we cant prosper.

                                                    I agree we need change on lots of things, wealth distribution, envioment, and we focus generaly too much on material things too, but i also think you shouldnt go too far.

                                                    God has given us desires to improve our lot on this planet. Increased material wealth has done that in many ways. But its not the whole answer for sure.

                                                    I just worry some people in this tribe throw out the baby with the bath water.

                                                    In the politics tribe its the other way around, everyone focus on logical stuff, gdp, in this tribe its more about emotion, spirituality, and change, but to me the answer is somewhere in the middle of them.

                                                    Im a great believer in the Buddhist saying that the middle way is the wise way.
                                                    • Mon
                                                      Mon
                                                      offline 7

                                                      Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                                                      Tue, November 3, 2009 - 1:41 PM
                                                      I'm not so much *against* rich people themselves, I'm *against* the rules and regulations that make the gap possible, and the way this issue is neglected by politicians etc. etc.
                                                      • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                                                        Tue, November 3, 2009 - 2:01 PM
                                                        <I'm not so much *against* rich people themselves, I'm *against* the rules and regulations that make the gap possible, and the way this issue is neglected by politicians etc. etc.>

                                                        I agree with that.

                                                        its funny Ramon, when we get into these debates we normally progressively disagree, but then we kind of come to a moment of truth when we tend to really agree mostly in the middle.



                                                        And talking with you and Wil just now i agree things need to change MORE than i was talking about before.

                                                        You know with the project im working on, which may well go very big and influential, these questions are really hard to work out for me, because there difficult. I mean really the are, and i feel a sense of responsibility.

                                                        I agree with you absoutly that gap needs to be reduced, but how much ? you said before that you can accept a soceity where those who do worker harder, or are more clever and study harder, get rewarded more, but you just want it more fair.

                                                        Its very hard to work out what is fair. And what can work, USSR and China didnt seem to work well. But then Cuba, to some extent did seem to, realtive to other central and south american countries work quite well.

                                                        I think im actuly in favour of something like between Cuba and Sweden if you can imagine it ! Problem is though Ramon, this isnt just about you me and Wil, its what everyone thinks, because dictatorships arnt good, and so with democracy you can have to go with the majority.

                                                        But the media can have a big influence on what people think. I agree with you there. Thats why these questions drive me mad, because i have a responsiblity with what im doing.

                                                        Not that ultimatly it will be down to me, but i have to work out what to think when i meet the people like Jeffry Sachs etc.

                                                        Talking with you Ramon, always helps me feel a better sense of what is right, I can honestly say that, and Wil.

                                                        If my project comes off im going to ask you two guys for your opinion all the more, lol.

                                                        By the way Wil if i do get success with it i can guarantee you bio char is going to be massive. So long as the research there doing into it over the next few years is conclusive, and there are some worries it might not work as well in temperate soils etc, but the experts are saying they only need about 2-3 years to confirm its kosher, if that comes up ok, then i think it has absolutely HUGE potential, not just on climate change but on wealth transfers to the developing world. It was you who put me onto that. I owe you a thanks for that.

                                                    • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                                                      Tue, November 3, 2009 - 1:48 PM
                                                      <I got nothing much good to say about extreme accumulation of wealth or the screwed up societal values that lead to people trying to accumulate wealth as if it is a sport while others are in such need. Sure looks like parasitism to me. A lot of what the wealthy choose to do with their money is against the good of society. Gates did not sweat blood for his money. A guy pulling down near minimum wage working hard labor trying to support a family, he sweats blood for his money.>

                                                      i got to admit your post has really made me think though, because i respect your opinion.

                                                      I dont think its true to say however that hard labour is neccesairly "harder" than white collar work. Ive done both in my life. And just how hard either is depends, but ive never done anything so hard as set up my own business, stress is harder task master than hard labour, and i can say that as someone who was a push bike delivery guy for 2 1/2 years in my youth, earning around the minimum wage, and trust me doing that on the streets of London isn't easy.

                                                      But i take your point that getting materially well off HAS become almost like a fashionable sport for many, and while lots of people struggle, that's not good.

                                                      But i ask you too Wil, how far do you want to go with that ? As far as 1920's USSR, or 1960's China ? That's the question, how much do you take out the incentives - the rewards, to achieve ?

                                                      ANd if you take them out completely, you dont think that's going to kill the dynamism of society ?

                                                      I agree though that the dynamism doesn't always work well. Culture, art, spirituality, time out to just rest, time in nature, all these things should be valued more.

                                                      But I think they are starting to be, the more you think about this, the more complex this is really.
                                • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                                  Sun, November 1, 2009 - 9:49 AM
                                  Here is a list of peace prize winners. The wikipedia article on the nobel prize does a good job of explaining it.
                                  en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_prize


                                  * 2009 - Barack Obama
                                  * 2008 - Martti Ahtisaari
                                  * 2007 - Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Al Gore
                                  * 2006 - Muhammad Yunus, Grameen Bank
                                  * 2005 - International Atomic Energy Agency, Mohamed ElBaradei
                                  * 2004 - Wangari Maathai
                                  * 2003 - Shirin Ebadi
                                  * 2002 - Jimmy Carter
                                  * 2001 - United Nations, Kofi Annan
                                  * 2000 - Kim Dae-jung
                                  * 1999 - Médecins Sans Frontières
                                  * 1998 - John Hume, David Trimble
                                  * 1997 - International Campaign to Ban Landmines, Jody Williams
                                  * 1996 - Carlos Filipe Ximenes Belo, José Ramos-Horta
                                  * 1995 - Joseph Rotblat, Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs
                                  * 1994 - Yasser Arafat, Shimon Peres, Yitzhak Rabin
                                  * 1993 - Nelson Mandela, F.W. de Klerk
                                  * 1992 - Rigoberta Menchú Tum
                                  * 1991 - Aung San Suu Kyi
                                  * 1990 - Mikhail Gorbachev
                                  * 1989 - The 14th Dalai Lama
                                  * 1988 - United Nations Peacekeeping Forces
                                  * 1987 - Oscar Arias Sánchez
                                  * 1986 - Elie Wiesel
                                  * 1985 - International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War
                                  * 1984 - Desmond Tutu
                                  * 1983 - Lech Walesa
                                  * 1982 - Alva Myrdal, Alfonso García Robles
                                  * 1981 - Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees
                                  * 1980 - Adolfo Pérez Esquivel
                                  * 1979 - Mother Teresa
                                  * 1978 - Anwar al-Sadat, Menachem Begin
                                  * 1977 - Amnesty International
                                  * 1976 - Betty Williams, Mairead Corrigan
                                  * 1975 - Andrei Sakharov
                                  * 1974 - Seán MacBride, Eisaku Sato
                                  * 1973 - Henry Kissinger, Le Duc Tho
                                  * 1972 - The prize money for 1972 was allocated to the Main Fund
                                  * 1971 - Willy Brandt
                                  * 1970 - Norman Borlaug
                                  * 1969 - International Labour Organization
                                  * 1968 - René Cassin
                                  * 1967 - The prize money was with 1/3 allocated to the Main Fund and with 2/3 to the Special Fund of this prize section
                                  * 1966 - The prize money was allocated to the Special Fund of this prize section
                                  * 1965 - United Nations Children's Fund
                                  * 1964 - Martin Luther King Jr.
                                  * 1963 - International Committee of the Red Cross, League of Red Cross Societies
                                  * 1962 - Linus Pauling
                                  * 1961 - Dag Hammarskjöld
                                  * 1960 - Albert Lutuli
                                  * 1959 - Philip Noel-Baker
                                  * 1958 - Georges Pire
                                  * 1957 - Lester Bowles Pearson
                                  * 1956 - The prize money was with 1/3 allocated to the Main Fund and with 2/3 to the Special Fund of this prize section
                                  * 1955 - The prize money was allocated to the Special Fund of this prize section
                                  * 1954 - Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees
                                  * 1953 - George C. Marshall
                                  * 1952 - Albert Schweitzer
                                  * 1951 - Léon Jouhaux
                                  * 1950 - Ralph Bunche
                                  * 1949 - Lord Boyd Orr
                                  * 1948 - The prize money was with 1/3 allocated to the Main Fund and with 2/3 to the Special Fund of this prize section
                                  * 1947 - Friends Service Council, American Friends Service Committee
                                  * 1946 - Emily Greene Balch, John R. Mott
                                  * 1945 - Cordell Hull
                                  * 1944 - International Committee of the Red Cross
                                  * 1943 - The prize money was with 1/3 allocated to the Main Fund and with 2/3 to the Special Fund of this prize section
                                  * 1942 - The prize money was with 1/3 allocated to the Main Fund and with 2/3 to the Special Fund of this prize section
                                  * 1941 - The prize money was with 1/3 allocated to the Main Fund and with 2/3 to the Special Fund of this prize section
                                  * 1940 - The prize money was with 1/3 allocated to the Main Fund and with 2/3 to the Special Fund of this prize section
                                  * 1939 - The prize money was with 1/3 allocated to the Main Fund and with 2/3 to the Special Fund of this prize section
                                  * 1938 - Nansen International Office for Refugees
                                  * 1937 - Robert Cecil
                                  * 1936 - Carlos Saavedra Lamas
                                  * 1935 - Carl von Ossietzky
                                  * 1934 - Arthur Henderson
                                  * 1933 - Sir Norman Angell
                                  * 1932 - The prize money was allocated to the Special Fund of this prize section
                                  * 1931 - Jane Addams, Nicholas Murray Butler
                                  * 1930 - Nathan Söderblom
                                  * 1929 - Frank B. Kellogg
                                  * 1928 - The prize money was allocated to the Special Fund of this prize section
                                  * 1927 - Ferdinand Buisson, Ludwig Quidde
                                  * 1926 - Aristide Briand, Gustav Stresemann
                                  * 1925 - Sir Austen Chamberlain, Charles G. Dawes
                                  * 1924 - The prize money was allocated to the Special Fund of this prize section
                                  * 1923 - The prize money was allocated to the Special Fund of this prize section
                                  * 1922 - Fridtjof Nansen
                                  * 1921 - Hjalmar Branting, Christian Lange
                                  * 1920 - Léon Bourgeois
                                  * 1919 - Woodrow Wilson
                                  * 1918 - The prize money was allocated to the Special Fund of this prize section
                                  * 1917 - International Committee of the Red Cross
                                  * 1916 - The prize money was allocated to the Special Fund of this prize section
                                  * 1915 - The prize money was allocated to the Special Fund of this prize section
                                  * 1914 - The prize money was allocated to the Special Fund of this prize section
                                  * 1913 - Henri La Fontaine
                                  * 1912 - Elihu Root
                                  * 1911 - Tobias Asser, Alfred Fried
                                  * 1910 - Permanent International Peace Bureau
                                  * 1909 - Auguste Beernaert, Paul Henri d'Estournelles de Constant
                                  * 1908 - Klas Pontus Arnoldson, Fredrik Bajer
                                  * 1907 - Ernesto Teodoro Moneta, Louis Renault
                                  * 1906 - Theodore Roosevelt
                                  * 1905 - Bertha von Suttner
                                  * 1904 - Institute of International Law
                                  * 1903 - Randal Cremer
                                  * 1902 - Élie Ducommun, Albert Gobat
                                  * 1901 - Henry Dunant, Frédéric Passy
                                  • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                                    Tue, November 3, 2009 - 6:26 PM
                                    "That's the question, how much do you take out the incentives - the rewards, to achieve ?"

                                    You just nailed the game. It's the dangling carrot.
                                    That's why Hollywood and sports is hyped so much. "If you work hard, are clever... ...you too could win this lotto."
                                    It's a scham disigned to keep everyone ignorant of their true potential.
                                    Work 40+ hours a week at a job you hate for the bare minimum of what it takes to survive in this system, while people you don't know raise your children in a warring governments approved institution, only to crawl through traffic in a coffin to a coffin that you probably don't even own 'cuz of the insane mortgage game, to finally "relax" in front of a box that spoonfeeds you the agenda that makes it tolerable to do it again tomorrow and for the rest of your life.
                                    For those of us that have recognized this game for YEARS, in my own life, as well as studing the history of the last 2000 years, waiting another "100 years", as you say, is what is intolerable.
                                    My biggest frustration IS with We the People. Your soft approach to these issues makes no sense to me. The plane is going down, the engines have stopped, and we keep turnin the wheel and pushing buttons as if the existing system is in working order. We, as a whole humanity, are really getting too wise to continue to allow this.
                                    "They're pollishing brass on the Titanic, man. It's all goin' down"
                                    • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                                      Tue, November 3, 2009 - 6:31 PM
                                      "We must create a new reality rendering the old reality obsolete."
                                      ...or something to that effect.

                                      I never trusted Obama, and I'm fairly left. Just another puppet. People called me on my predictions years before, and just prior to, the election.
                                      It doesn't always feel good to be right.
                                      • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                                        Tue, November 3, 2009 - 6:35 PM
                                        I think if you really defined exactly what the incentives to achieve are, and who pushes these definitions, you might begin to see the bigger scham.

                                        All I want is health and joy, and no fancy car, big house, retirement plan, or benefits package can give me that.
                                        • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                                          Wed, November 4, 2009 - 4:41 AM
                                          <It's a scham disigned to keep everyone ignorant of their true potential.
                                          Work 40+ hours a week at a job you hate for the bare minimum of what it takes to survive in this system, while people you don't know raise your children in a warring governments approved institution, only to crawl through traffic in a coffin>

                                          so what your saying, is there is nobody in the western world who has worked hard, studied at universtiy, found a job they like, get reasonably well paid, are satisfied with there job, and feel they have been rewarded for there work ?

                                          Thats rubbish, i know several people, who came from realtivly poor origions, who worked hard, got well educated, found jobs they like, and are well paid, if not rich.

                                          They have had some help with there children, but look after them sometimes themselves.

                                          Some of what you say can be true. But you paint such an extreme picture of it that it makes it a lie. Thats why youll never get a majority of the public beliving such far left talk, certainly in a country like America. Centre left sure, and unless Obama manages to get some of the stuff he claimed through, like universal health care, better paid work for Americans, reform of the finacial markets, then I dont classify Obama as centre left, maybe a failed centre left government, where he has been too weak to win his cause. But its too early to say that yet.

                                          But the picture you paint, is so extreme its just not true, as i say. I know a girl who came from a modest background in london, and now she's a BAFTA award wining producer. Shes not rich, but pretty well paid. She enjoys her job. She has children, she gets to spend time with them. There are plenty of other people like this.

                                          There are too heavily winners and losers, not so much in countries like Japan, Sweden, Denmark, Germany, but true in places like America, Brazil, China, India.

                                          If you exagerate your claims, and make the demands too extreme, then youll switch off the majority.

                                          <All I want is health and joy, and no fancy car, big house, retirement plan, or benefits package can give me that.>

                                          so what you need for health and joy that you cant get ?

                                          I accept the situation in America right now is very difficult for a lot of people, i accept that, and the top 1% have really screwed things up, mainly abbetted by Bush.

                                          Obama has made a small start on correcting things, but i totaly admit VERY small just yet - much more needs to be done. But the world was hading too far to the right, especialy America, for 30 years now, a big shift occured with Regan and Thatcher in Europe, and Bush only accelerated that, Clinton didnt do much, so that was a progessive moving for 30 years.

                                          It takes time to make a big shift on something as big as that. In the UK from 1945 - around 1976 there was a big move towards the left. Free health care set up, social security, better state education, more universal University education etc, but from 1979 there was a big swing to the right, and Blair, like clintion didnt change that much, so for 30 years there was a shift the other way.

                                          I want Obama to do a LOT more, but its not just down to him, its also down to the other democrats, a lot who already let him down on health care, the public, the voters, the media, and lots of other factors. 9 months, in these big cycles, isnt that long.

                                          But when you say -

                                          <All I want is health and joy, and no fancy car, big house, retirement plan, or benefits package can give me that.>

                                          so what you demanding society give you that it doesn't give ?

                                          one thing i would agree is that soceity these days can be a bit too much of a rat race. We place perhaps too much importance on job, money, material things, work, and not enough on time out, time in nature, culture and art, music, spirtuality.

                                          But that i think is a different argument. And some countries do live more like that. They say work work work is an anglo saxon thing, that English and Americans to some extent share.

                                          But over in Spain, Italy and France, many of them still take 2 - 3 hour siestas from work. They say there they work to live, whereas we live to work.

                                          Is that the sort of thing you mean ?

                                          Because if it is, is it really realistic to expect a president to deliver them cultural changes ? There cultural changes, that must come from people changing.


                                          • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                                            Wed, November 4, 2009 - 3:30 PM
                                            "so what your saying, is there is nobody in the western world who has worked hard, studied at universtiy, found a job they like, get reasonably well paid, are satisfied with there job, and feel they have been rewarded for there work ?"

                                            Goddamn I despise the polarization argument. Of course that is not what I'm saying, but in my experience the down trodden are the majority by far. Even many who have worked hard and have seemingly kush positions here in the beautiful mountains are some of the most cynical folks I know.

                                            "so what you need for health and joy that you cant get ?"

                                            True freedom. To be left alone by the Government. Proper education for children. You're tagged as a potential threat if you homeschool or grow your own food off the grid. Larger selection of unprocessed, un-genetic food. Bullshit "war on drugs" while Pharms flow freely, are encouraged by the ignorant western med system, and are not fully tested for long term. The bombardment of media generated fear, coercing consumption is out of control. It's getting hard to breathe in this system anymore, let alone enjoy it.



                                            I've been arrested and thrown in jail 3 times in the last 3 years for shit I wasn't even around for. One of them cost me a good job with the F.S. wildland fire dept. Slander across the Sierras on TV, radio, and print before even being charged.
                                            Lost another job with Burning Man. I sat in Sparks max security with the murderers and rapists for a week before bullshit charges were even filed. THAT IS ILLEGAL!! Noone even knew where I was. No record of my arrest for a week. We got Guantanamo right here. I tried filing civil suits. I'm not sure if your aware of it, but We the Sheeple have no recourse of action without a FAT bank account. How can you battle the police and sheriff department anyway. Ever heard of "cop made crime". It's like dealing with a drunk frat boy in a bar. If he wants a fight you either give up your night and bail, or you are forced to defend yourself.
                                            That's just my major gripe.
                                            You can't walk into the backcountry for the night without declaring it. Huge fine if you're found sleeping under the stars without a permit. You can't get a permit if you can't prove permanent residence. This is not the way we were made to exist.
                                            I'm a mountain man with native blood, I just want to live a simple life, but folks are afraid of true freedom, and stick their fuckin nose into everything. How many times I've been told I "can't do that" as I'm doing it. People are mostly scared, panicky, idiots and they want me to share the experience. Fuck that.
                                            Can't soak in the local hot springs anymore "for our safety". BULLSHIT!! Humans have been soakin in this spot for milennia. I'm more likely to get hit by a car, or shot by an overzealous cop, than boil in a fart of Mother Nature.
                                            CAGE EVERYONE!!
                                            The security patrol needs a permanent vacation.
                                            The silent weapons that control the flow of our culture is stifling for most. The Federal Reserve is a private "corporate" entity with a perfect design. Shit, they insight war between nations with a simple turn of the dial. Where I live folks have upwards of 3 jobs, and they still barely cover rent for rundown ski shacks. Once you recognize one system, variations of the scham can be seen everywhere.
                                            Anyway, If you don't wanna see it, I can't show you.
                                            I'm light on the environment. My carbon print is very small.
                                            I have bushcraft skills and can easily live off the land, nomad style.
                                            I'm not a dangerous anarchist or some subversive terrorist.
                                            I just want to be left alone to live like a "real" human being on Planet Earth.
                                            The Native Americans were the last truely free people that I know of.

                                            Freedumb. There givin it away!
                                            • Mon
                                              Mon
                                              offline 7

                                              Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                                              Wed, November 4, 2009 - 5:24 PM
                                              pp: "...But the picture you paint, is so extreme its just not true, as i say...."

                                              >>> Even if Bill Gates gives everything away save for 1 Billion, he still has too much in my book, if others are starving. You could say I'm thinking too extreme, but I think I'm actually keeping it quite simple.

                                              10 apples + 10 kids = 1 apple per kid.

                                              People often say that this is not attainable or within human nature, but then who's really the cynic?
                                              And why do people go on and on abour Love, yet do not believe we cam live this way?
                                              Or why does everyone condemn racism, yet not classism?



                                              Private property of resources and means of production is theft.

                                              The governments, laws and law enforcement, financial institutions, big pharma, military expenditure and other such shenenigans start with our acceptance of the property of land, resources and means of production in the hands of single humans, rather than the community.

                                              I suspect his is not a popular perspective because those who control most aspects of society, including education, the media, religion (and therefore a big part of human behaviors and beliefs) do not want us to think about or look into these things.

                                              With the amount of wealth floating around at the top, I find it strange that people like Obama ask the masses to be patient, to have faith, and to give him some leeway and time. This is the same old story we've heard so many times before and if it seems that demanding a drastic stop to it is radical, than so be it, but by God let's stop trying to fix this horrific system and putting our faith in politicians...


                                              • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                                                Thu, November 5, 2009 - 4:10 AM
                                                Ramon i agree with you that the eradication of extreme poverty should have a much higher priority, there, as you say, should be non of it exists, but its also not easy to solve it just like that in places like Africa, where you have often to deal with some very corrupt unsavory governments who dont care a damn about there people, you think Bush was bad, they make him look like Jesus.

                                                But them things CAN be gotten around, and Sachs and people like Muhamad Yunis have good ideas on that.

                                                I also think more should be done about poverty in the wealth and wealth distribution, and the rich SHOULD be taxed more.

                                                But my concern is less about making the rich poor, rather making the poor OK.

                                                So we agree on some things, but when you say property is theft i think thats not only wrong but also immoral. If 200 years ago, your ancestors had found a plot of land in a remote part of the US, and built a farm and log cabin with lots and lots of hard effort, blood, sweat and tears, and i came along a few years later, and said," hey, this is not your property, property is theft, you have to share it half with me". and id done nothing but say, live it up in the bars in the towns the previous few years, you think thats fair ?

                                                Its nuts. But i agree with the need for better wealth distribution. I also think the minimum wage should be raised. Much better education in poor areas etc.

                                                Puma, many of the issues you talk about are local issues. Here in the UK the law on weed for example is pretty lax, in London up till recently they had it actuly even semi legal, nothing would happen if caught by the police with a small quantity.

                                                I agree many parts of the US are way to uptight on that. I find it horrific that people can get prison terms for small quantities of weed, that would never happen in the UK or most other parts of Europe.

                                                If it really bothers you so much why dont you think of moving to a more liberal state like Oregan, ive heard that in parts of Oregan the police are so liberal on it they turn a blind eye to big groups of people driving out to the woods and geting stoned, they know it goes on and chose to ignore it.

                                                • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                                                  Thu, November 5, 2009 - 4:11 AM
                                                  <I also think more should be done about poverty in the wealth>

                                                  more should be done about poverty in the wealthy nations.
                                                  • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                                                    Thu, November 5, 2009 - 4:17 AM
                                                    <
                                                    I've been arrested and thrown in jail 3 times in the last 3 years for shit I wasn't even around for. One of them cost me a good job with the F.S. wildland fire dept. Slander across the Sierras on TV, radio, and print before even being charged.
                                                    Lost another job with Burning Man. I sat in Sparks max security with the murderers and rapists for a week before bullshit charges were even filed. THAT IS ILLEGAL!! Noone even knew where I was. No record of my arrest for a week. We got Guantanamo right here. I tried filing civil suits. I'm not sure if your aware of it, but We the Sheeple have no recourse of action without a FAT bank account. >

                                                    i had skimmed your post at first, that is terrible, i dont want to sound unsympathetic, i think thats disgraceful. Again it would not happen here. Im sure amearica varies a lot from state to state right, so if this is really a big problem for you, like i say, you not think it could be an idea to consider moving state ? As i say, ive heard Oregon is very liberal, though i realise its a bit thing to just move away from friends etc, and i dont know if you have kids.

                                                    For sure America is in need of some very serious change. Im not trying to be funny but parts of your system, like the legal system, seem like about 100 years behind how it used to work in Europe !

                                                    Lets hope Obama improves things eventualy, or in any case there is change.
                                                    • Re: Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

                                                      Thu, November 5, 2009 - 4:24 AM
                                                      <I just want to be left alone to live like a "real" human being on Planet Earth.
                                                      The Native Americans were the last truely free people that I know of. >

                                                      I really admire your spirt and understand the kind of life you want to live. LIke i say, arnt there other parts of the US where you can live that life better, without that kind of hassel ? though i know its a big thing to move from where you know. I live myself in London, in the United Kingdom, and there is nothing like that kind of hassel here, though we dont have the wilderness.

                                                      I love wilderness myself, and understand why you want to live as you do, and i respect that. I think its quite noble in a way.

                                                      Im sure states like Oregan its much easier to sleep out in nature without hassle - , far easier to get away with smoking weed without geting into any trouble, etc. Ive a friend on politics who lives there, if you like i can ask him for information ?

                                                      I also know empty cloud on here is a big outdoors person, and lives in a remote part of Colorado, im not sure if the hassles you talk of where you live are the same there ? Maybe ask him ?

                                                      Id be amased if there were no parts of the USA where you cant sleep out in nature without being hassled.

Recent topics in "Year 2012"

Topic Author Replies Last Post
Jose Arguelles Lana 0 Today, 4:40 AM
a place for songs we love mia 255 Today, 4:30 AM
so i blame myself CALI 22 Today, 4:05 AM
Why We Should Be Terrified of the 2012 Apocalypse CALI 1 Today, 2:00 AM