Originally posted on myspace.com/kbp54
May 5, 2009 - Tuesday
The study of the the night life of gay men's nocturnal activities inArgentina.http://www.msplinks.com/MDFodHRwOi8vd3d3LmNuc25ld3MuY29tL3B1YmxpYy9jb250ZW50L2FydGljbGUuYXNweD9Sc3JjSUQ9NDc1MjM=Because we really need to know what goes on in the night life there.(sarcasm)Oh, and one more thing... We're not suppose to refer to it as Swine Flu, but rather its scientific name: H1N1Why? I guess we don't want to offend pigs... and who can blame that thought... they taste so good.Another case of political correctness running amok.
Feds Will Spend $400,000 to Study Drinking and Sex Habits of Homosexuals in ArgentinaMonday, May 04, 2009By Matt Cover, Staff Writer
(CNSNews.com) – The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is funding a study that seeks to discover a link between drinking and having sex among homosexuals in Argentina.The study will send researchers to six bars in Buenos Aires to interview both patrons and proprietors in an effort to discover what it is about those bars that may encourage the risky behavior. The study began on Sept. 30, 2008, and runs through Aug. 31, 2010. It already has cost taxpayers $198,776. By the time the project ends, it will have cost $403,902, according to NIH. The grant, awarded to the New York State Psychiatric Institute, was provided by the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA), the division of NIH that studies the effects of alcohol and alcoholism. The study’s primary focus is to determine the relationship among drinking, bars frequented by homosexuals, and risky sexual behavior to see if certain bars in Argentina might be good targets for HIV-prevention campaigns. “Targeting public venues in Buenos Aires where men meet, alcohol is consumed, and sexual behavior occurs, the goal of this two-year exploratory study is to understand the various factors that contribute to the creation of a high-risk sexual space,” the study’s abstract explains. "To that end, the study seeks to describe the relative contribution of physical characteristics of the place, patron characteristics, type and level of alcohol consumption, and social dynamics that are at play and potentiate each other to result in sexual risk behavior." The study has six goals, including the collection of information on six specific bars in Buenos Aires; the appearance, of those bars, alcohol availability, patrons, and types of sexual behavior taking place. The study also seeks to identify which factors contribute to alcohol consumption and sexual behavior in the bars. “The specific aims of this study are to … 2) identify factors that contribute to alcohol use and high-risk sexual behavior in the venues,” says the abstract. Researchers will interview 48 of the men who patronize the bars, as well as the bar staff to gather information on the types of alcohol consumed and sexual behavior engaged in. “Venue patrons will also undergo a brief quantitative assessment to gather descriptive data on sexual behavior and substance use.” After discovering why men who drink in these bars have homosexual sex, researchers will then try to discover whether it is possible to conduct anti-HIV interventions and how to conduct those interventions. The study will “4) assess willingness of venue owners/personnel to partner with HIV prevention organizations in reducing HIV risk in these settings and [what] types of prevention programs they find acceptable.” While the study is being conducted in Argentina, it is being funded with U.S. tax dollars. The grant recipients--who could not be reached for comment--say in the abstract that information gathered in the bars in Argentina might help inform similar efforts in America. “We expect findings to be useful in informing venue-based interventions for these types of venues in other countries.” The study is among a number funded by the NIAAA to examine the relationship between drinking and the spread of HIV, including a study of tourism, prostitution, and HIV in the Dominican Republic and another study examining drinking and HIV among prostitutes in China.
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
Southwest sucks for car owners
Originally posted on myspace.com/kbp54
September 3, 2009 - Thursday
Take a look at this articlehttp://www.automopedia.org/2009/04/13/top-25-car-theft-cities/12 of the 25 worst cities for car theft are in California and 18 total are in the Southwest area (to include Texas, Nevada, Arizona, California, and New Mexico)I can attest to Detroit being terrible for car theft having witnessed many burnt out shells of cars scattered along the way but its scary to think that Tucson (just 45 miles away) which is a city we go to a lot for Doctor trips and whatnont, is number 13 on the list. I've always heard that Tucson was a hotbed for car theft. Very disturbing.
September 3, 2009 - Thursday
Take a look at this articlehttp://www.automopedia.org/2009/04/13/top-25-car-theft-cities/12 of the 25 worst cities for car theft are in California and 18 total are in the Southwest area (to include Texas, Nevada, Arizona, California, and New Mexico)I can attest to Detroit being terrible for car theft having witnessed many burnt out shells of cars scattered along the way but its scary to think that Tucson (just 45 miles away) which is a city we go to a lot for Doctor trips and whatnont, is number 13 on the list. I've always heard that Tucson was a hotbed for car theft. Very disturbing.
Strange days are here
originally posted on myspace.com/kbp54
September 8, 2009 - Tuesday
My topic is current political currents and trends. I'm not an alarmist, but I feel that if some attention isn't drawn to some disturbing trends and events then things really will become a Mell of a Hess.
I've read and seen some videos that are, for lack of a better way to put it, bonkers. One that I have seen that Stephanie directed me to on YouTube had some Hollywood celebrities saying that they would pledge themselves as servants to Obama (in this case it was Demi Moore) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTQawLBC59g Trust Hollywood types to be hair brained about things and to get them backwards. Mr. Obama is a servant of the people. He is an elected official. When I saw packs of trading cards of him at Target I thought it was innapropriate but when I hear and see the liberal left wing loonies talking about this obedience to Obama crap it makes the hair on my neck stand on end. I support Mr. Obama because he is our elected President but that does not mean I swear fealty to him as these nuts imply we should. Maybe they're not being as serious as I deem them, but I take them at their word in this. Have we learned nothing from history? Adolf Hitler demanded his followers swear loyalty to him directly (and they did) and not the office of Chancellor (even that is not a good idea) or to the constitution (or form of one) of Germany. Its the kind of stuff that freaks me out. Do people really realize what they are setting themselves up for with that kind of thinking and talk? This will give you some idea of what people should really be thinking: Oath of Enlistment In the Armed Forces EXCEPT the National Guard (Army or Air)
I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.
http://www.msplinks.com/MDFodHRwOi8vdXNtaWxpdGFyeS5hYm91dC5jb20vb2Qvam9pbmluZ3RoZW1pbGl0YXJ5L2Evb2F0aG9mZW5saXN0Lmh0bQ==our loyalty should be to the Constitution of America and to the orders of the President as mentioned above. It says "according to regulations" but that means that any order that is unlawfully given (such as shooting innocent civilians) is to be disregarded and refused. If the President gives an unlawful order (it can happen) it should be disregarded as well. The tired old excuse "I was just following orders" that has been given an innumerable amount of times is no alibi for misbehavior. It didn't save the Nazi leaders in the Nuremburg trials and it won't save anyone else either. My intent is not to tar this administration for being like the Nazis. I look at it as a cult of personality which is always a disturbing thing. It has happened time and time again in history and it has always gone bad.
September 8, 2009 - Tuesday
My topic is current political currents and trends. I'm not an alarmist, but I feel that if some attention isn't drawn to some disturbing trends and events then things really will become a Mell of a Hess.
I've read and seen some videos that are, for lack of a better way to put it, bonkers. One that I have seen that Stephanie directed me to on YouTube had some Hollywood celebrities saying that they would pledge themselves as servants to Obama (in this case it was Demi Moore) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTQawLBC59g Trust Hollywood types to be hair brained about things and to get them backwards. Mr. Obama is a servant of the people. He is an elected official. When I saw packs of trading cards of him at Target I thought it was innapropriate but when I hear and see the liberal left wing loonies talking about this obedience to Obama crap it makes the hair on my neck stand on end. I support Mr. Obama because he is our elected President but that does not mean I swear fealty to him as these nuts imply we should. Maybe they're not being as serious as I deem them, but I take them at their word in this. Have we learned nothing from history? Adolf Hitler demanded his followers swear loyalty to him directly (and they did) and not the office of Chancellor (even that is not a good idea) or to the constitution (or form of one) of Germany. Its the kind of stuff that freaks me out. Do people really realize what they are setting themselves up for with that kind of thinking and talk? This will give you some idea of what people should really be thinking: Oath of Enlistment In the Armed Forces EXCEPT the National Guard (Army or Air)
I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.
http://www.msplinks.com/MDFodHRwOi8vdXNtaWxpdGFyeS5hYm91dC5jb20vb2Qvam9pbmluZ3RoZW1pbGl0YXJ5L2Evb2F0aG9mZW5saXN0Lmh0bQ==our loyalty should be to the Constitution of America and to the orders of the President as mentioned above. It says "according to regulations" but that means that any order that is unlawfully given (such as shooting innocent civilians) is to be disregarded and refused. If the President gives an unlawful order (it can happen) it should be disregarded as well. The tired old excuse "I was just following orders" that has been given an innumerable amount of times is no alibi for misbehavior. It didn't save the Nazi leaders in the Nuremburg trials and it won't save anyone else either. My intent is not to tar this administration for being like the Nazis. I look at it as a cult of personality which is always a disturbing thing. It has happened time and time again in history and it has always gone bad.
Monday, November 23, 2009
Seeing 20/20 on 2012
originally posted on myspace.com/kbp54
November 11, 2009 - Wednesday
There is some speculation that the world will end on December 21st 2012 but I think that such thought is false. As a true Christian and believer in the Bible (as far as it is translated correctly) I am highly skeptical.
Matthew 24:36
But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angles of heaven, but my Father only.
Mark 13:22
But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither he Son, but the Father.
We are not meant to know when Jesus will return. If we were, we would know already. It seems that we as humans like to think we know so much, even more than God Himself. Or some like to think that God doesn't exist anyway, so it is easy to dismiss His word. We seem more inclined to believe human predictions than those of true prophets of God. Interestingly there are more than one civilizations that predict close to this time, as I have watched on the History Channel. But so many civilizations also believed in the existence of vampires and werewolves that I don't buy into that so easily. Perhaps their predictions only pertained to their own individual civilizations. According to their line of thought at the time, they probably thought they were all there was in the world. Think about it, how much interaction did they have with civilizations beyond their own scope? Until 1492 Europe didn't know about the existence of the Americas. I see so many plausable mistakes in these predictions. Remember how paranoid people got about Y2K? I recall hearing about a man in China who said the world would end in 1994. He missed the mark on that one.However, it is my suspicion that God Himself doesn't even know the day of the second coming (which may not be the cataclysmic end of the world) because it is, as I understand, dependent on our own agency as a world collectively. Meaning the faster we become corrupted, the sooner the second coming will occur. Perhaps our world will be vastly devastated before he returns, say from the fallout from Armageddon. I'm not sure on the timetable, but I as I said, I believe what the Bible says as long as it has been translated correctly. Make no mistake there will be trials and tribulations as predicted in the Bible, the question remains as to how bad and when it will all happen.The only truly momentous event that I think will happen around December 2012 is the Presidential election, which is when Mr. Obama is up for re-election. Perhaps he won't be re-elected and that will spark some hysteria. Who knows?
This blog may seem choppy and inconsistent in its flow. This is probably due to my slipshod editing. Bear with me please.
November 11, 2009 - Wednesday
There is some speculation that the world will end on December 21st 2012 but I think that such thought is false. As a true Christian and believer in the Bible (as far as it is translated correctly) I am highly skeptical.
Matthew 24:36
But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angles of heaven, but my Father only.
Mark 13:22
But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither he Son, but the Father.
We are not meant to know when Jesus will return. If we were, we would know already. It seems that we as humans like to think we know so much, even more than God Himself. Or some like to think that God doesn't exist anyway, so it is easy to dismiss His word. We seem more inclined to believe human predictions than those of true prophets of God. Interestingly there are more than one civilizations that predict close to this time, as I have watched on the History Channel. But so many civilizations also believed in the existence of vampires and werewolves that I don't buy into that so easily. Perhaps their predictions only pertained to their own individual civilizations. According to their line of thought at the time, they probably thought they were all there was in the world. Think about it, how much interaction did they have with civilizations beyond their own scope? Until 1492 Europe didn't know about the existence of the Americas. I see so many plausable mistakes in these predictions. Remember how paranoid people got about Y2K? I recall hearing about a man in China who said the world would end in 1994. He missed the mark on that one.However, it is my suspicion that God Himself doesn't even know the day of the second coming (which may not be the cataclysmic end of the world) because it is, as I understand, dependent on our own agency as a world collectively. Meaning the faster we become corrupted, the sooner the second coming will occur. Perhaps our world will be vastly devastated before he returns, say from the fallout from Armageddon. I'm not sure on the timetable, but I as I said, I believe what the Bible says as long as it has been translated correctly. Make no mistake there will be trials and tribulations as predicted in the Bible, the question remains as to how bad and when it will all happen.The only truly momentous event that I think will happen around December 2012 is the Presidential election, which is when Mr. Obama is up for re-election. Perhaps he won't be re-elected and that will spark some hysteria. Who knows?
This blog may seem choppy and inconsistent in its flow. This is probably due to my slipshod editing. Bear with me please.
Nobel is not so noble now
Originally posted on myspace.com/kbp54
October 9, 2009 - Friday
President Obama has been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize and to that I say "What a load of horse dung!"
He was given the award for what he is "expected to do"If that was how things should really be I should give the Super Bowl trophy to the Chicago Bears because I "expect" them to win it. (not really, but it would be nice)
Case in point: The nominations for the Prize were due when Obama had been in office just 11 days. That means someone put him in for it before he could effectively do anything. The reasoning behind his nomination and eventual win was that he "changed the political climate of the world." How did he do that before he had time to do anything? Is it just because he is black and is now President? If I were black I would find that HIGHLY insulting. I do anyway.
Seems like affirmative action run amok.
Wouldn't it be nice to get 1 million dollars before we even try anything.
I'm reminded of a favorite quote from The Simpsons.
Lisa Simpson asks her Grandfather, when it was revealed that he was recieving royalties for cartoons that Lisa and Bart had been writing using his name:
"Grandpa, didn't you wonder why you were getting all this money for doing nothing?"
To which Grandpa Simpson replies: "I just thought the Democrats were in power again"
and indeed they are. It is through this kind of tripe that we will eventually see the fall of Capitalism (trust me, that WON'T be a good thing despite what crackpots like Michael Moore might say) and the decline of Western Civilization and Judeo Christian culture. Not that I'm necessarily against Islam, but I question its benevolent nature, or lack thereof but that is another story. Admittedly there are problems with Capitalism now, but it is also the driving force in innovation and the free market system. If we lose Capitalism both will take a serious setback.http://www.msplinks.com/MDFodHRwOi8vbmV3cy55YWhvby5jb20vcy9hcC9ldV9ub2JlbF9wZWFjZQ== --- 8/16/10 update. Looking back at what I wrote here I ponder what I was thinking with this last paragraph or segment. It is a bit much of a stretch to associate all of this with the downfall of capitalism. I won't delete it because it is something I wrote and I won't deny that I wrote it.
The above article has expired, so I found another one.
This time I'll copy and paste almost all of it here. I stopped when it shifted to talking about Bush's war.
OSLO — The announcement drew gasps of surprise and cries of too much, too soon. Yet President Barack Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize on Friday because the judges found his promise of disarmament and diplomacy too good to ignore.
The five-member Norwegian Nobel Committee — four of whom spoke to The Associated Press, said awarding Obama the peace prize could be seen as an early vote of confidence intended to build global support for the policies of his young administration.
They lauded the change in global mood wrought by Obama's calls for peace and cooperation, and praised his pledges to reduce the world stock of nuclear arms, ease U.S. conflicts with Muslim nations and strengthen its role in combating climate change.
"Some people say — and I understand it — 'Isn't it premature? Too early?' Well, I'd say then that it could be too late to respond three years from now," Thorbjoern Jagland, chairman of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, told the AP. "It is now that we have the opportunity to respond — all of us."
Jagland said the committee whittled down a record pool of 205 nominations and had "several candidates until the last minute," but it became more obvious that "we couldn't get around these deep changes that are taking place" under Obama.
Obama said he was surprised and deeply humbled by the honor, and planned to travel to Oslo in December to accept the prize.
"Let me be clear: I do not view it as a recognition of my own accomplishments, but rather as an affirmation of American leadership on behalf of aspirations held by people in all nations," he said at the White House. "To be honest, I do not feel that I deserve to be in the company of so many of the transformative figures who've been honored by this prize."
Obama will donate the $1.4 million cash award that comes with the prize to charity.
Archbishop Desmond Tutu of South Africa, who won the prize in 1984, said the decision showed that great things are expected from Obama and "wonderful recognition" of his effort to reach out to the Arab world after years of hostility.
"It is an award that speaks to the promise of President Obama's message of hope," Tutu said.
Many were shocked by the unexpected choice so early in a presidency that began less than two weeks before the Feb. 1 nomination deadline for the prize and has yet to yield concrete achievements in peacemaking.
"So soon? Too early. He has no contribution so far. He is only beginning to act," said former Polish President Lech Walesa, who won the peace prize in 1983.
Some around the world objected to the choice of Obama, who still oversees wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and has launched deadly counterterrorism strikes in Pakistan and Somalia.
Jagland told AP that while the war in Afghanistan was a concern, the Obama administration "immediately started to reassess the strategy."
"That itself is important, because when something goes wrong, then you need to ask yourself why is it going wrong," he said.
Obama said he was working to end the war in Iraq and "to confront a ruthless adversary that directly threatens the American people and our allies" in Afghanistan, where he is seriously considering increasing the number of U.S. troops on the ground and asking for help from others as the war enters its ninth year.
Taliban spokesman Qari Yousef Ahmadi in Afghanistan condemned the Nobel committee's decision, saying Obama had only escalated the war and had "the blood of the Afghan people on his hands."
Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki called the Nobel decision "hasty."
"The appropriate time for awarding such a prize is when foreign military forces leave Iraq and Afghanistan and when one stands by the rights of the oppressed Palestinian people," he was quoted as saying by the Mehr news agency.
Aagot Valle, a lawmaker for the Socialist Left party who joined the Nobel committee this year, said she hoped the selection would be viewed as "support and a commitment for Obama."
"And I hope it will be an inspiration for all those that work with nuclear disarmament and disarmament," she told AP in a rare interview. Members of the committee usually speak only through its chairman.
The peace prize was created partly to encourage ongoing peace efforts, but Obama's efforts are at far earlier stages than those of past winners, and the committee acknowledged they may not bear fruit at all.
"If everything goes wrong, then one cannot say that this was because of Barack Obama," Jagland said. "It could be that it is because of us, all the others, that didn't respond. But I cannot exclude that Barack Obama also can contribute to the eventual failure."
In Europe and much of the world, Obama is praised for bringing the U.S. closer to mainstream global thinking on such issues as climate change and multilateralism. A 25-nation poll of 27,000 people released in July by the Pew Global Attitudes Project found double-digit boosts to the percentage of people viewing the U.S. favorably in countries around the world. That indicator had plunged across the world under President George W. Bush.
http://www.journal-news.com/news/nation-world-news/obama-says-hes-a-surprised-by-nobel-prize-too-338923.html?showComments=true
and more
http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe/10/09/nobel.peace.prize/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe/10/09/nobel.peace.process/index.html
October 9, 2009 - Friday
President Obama has been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize and to that I say "What a load of horse dung!"
He was given the award for what he is "expected to do"If that was how things should really be I should give the Super Bowl trophy to the Chicago Bears because I "expect" them to win it. (not really, but it would be nice)
Case in point: The nominations for the Prize were due when Obama had been in office just 11 days. That means someone put him in for it before he could effectively do anything. The reasoning behind his nomination and eventual win was that he "changed the political climate of the world." How did he do that before he had time to do anything? Is it just because he is black and is now President? If I were black I would find that HIGHLY insulting. I do anyway.
Seems like affirmative action run amok.
Wouldn't it be nice to get 1 million dollars before we even try anything.
I'm reminded of a favorite quote from The Simpsons.
Lisa Simpson asks her Grandfather, when it was revealed that he was recieving royalties for cartoons that Lisa and Bart had been writing using his name:
"Grandpa, didn't you wonder why you were getting all this money for doing nothing?"
To which Grandpa Simpson replies: "I just thought the Democrats were in power again"
and indeed they are. It is through this kind of tripe that we will eventually see the fall of Capitalism (trust me, that WON'T be a good thing despite what crackpots like Michael Moore might say) and the decline of Western Civilization and Judeo Christian culture. Not that I'm necessarily against Islam, but I question its benevolent nature, or lack thereof but that is another story. Admittedly there are problems with Capitalism now, but it is also the driving force in innovation and the free market system. If we lose Capitalism both will take a serious setback.http://www.msplinks.com/MDFodHRwOi8vbmV3cy55YWhvby5jb20vcy9hcC9ldV9ub2JlbF9wZWFjZQ== --- 8/16/10 update. Looking back at what I wrote here I ponder what I was thinking with this last paragraph or segment. It is a bit much of a stretch to associate all of this with the downfall of capitalism. I won't delete it because it is something I wrote and I won't deny that I wrote it.
The above article has expired, so I found another one.
This time I'll copy and paste almost all of it here. I stopped when it shifted to talking about Bush's war.
OSLO — The announcement drew gasps of surprise and cries of too much, too soon. Yet President Barack Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize on Friday because the judges found his promise of disarmament and diplomacy too good to ignore.
The five-member Norwegian Nobel Committee — four of whom spoke to The Associated Press, said awarding Obama the peace prize could be seen as an early vote of confidence intended to build global support for the policies of his young administration.
They lauded the change in global mood wrought by Obama's calls for peace and cooperation, and praised his pledges to reduce the world stock of nuclear arms, ease U.S. conflicts with Muslim nations and strengthen its role in combating climate change.
"Some people say — and I understand it — 'Isn't it premature? Too early?' Well, I'd say then that it could be too late to respond three years from now," Thorbjoern Jagland, chairman of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, told the AP. "It is now that we have the opportunity to respond — all of us."
Jagland said the committee whittled down a record pool of 205 nominations and had "several candidates until the last minute," but it became more obvious that "we couldn't get around these deep changes that are taking place" under Obama.
Obama said he was surprised and deeply humbled by the honor, and planned to travel to Oslo in December to accept the prize.
"Let me be clear: I do not view it as a recognition of my own accomplishments, but rather as an affirmation of American leadership on behalf of aspirations held by people in all nations," he said at the White House. "To be honest, I do not feel that I deserve to be in the company of so many of the transformative figures who've been honored by this prize."
Obama will donate the $1.4 million cash award that comes with the prize to charity.
Archbishop Desmond Tutu of South Africa, who won the prize in 1984, said the decision showed that great things are expected from Obama and "wonderful recognition" of his effort to reach out to the Arab world after years of hostility.
"It is an award that speaks to the promise of President Obama's message of hope," Tutu said.
Many were shocked by the unexpected choice so early in a presidency that began less than two weeks before the Feb. 1 nomination deadline for the prize and has yet to yield concrete achievements in peacemaking.
"So soon? Too early. He has no contribution so far. He is only beginning to act," said former Polish President Lech Walesa, who won the peace prize in 1983.
Some around the world objected to the choice of Obama, who still oversees wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and has launched deadly counterterrorism strikes in Pakistan and Somalia.
Jagland told AP that while the war in Afghanistan was a concern, the Obama administration "immediately started to reassess the strategy."
"That itself is important, because when something goes wrong, then you need to ask yourself why is it going wrong," he said.
Obama said he was working to end the war in Iraq and "to confront a ruthless adversary that directly threatens the American people and our allies" in Afghanistan, where he is seriously considering increasing the number of U.S. troops on the ground and asking for help from others as the war enters its ninth year.
Taliban spokesman Qari Yousef Ahmadi in Afghanistan condemned the Nobel committee's decision, saying Obama had only escalated the war and had "the blood of the Afghan people on his hands."
Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki called the Nobel decision "hasty."
"The appropriate time for awarding such a prize is when foreign military forces leave Iraq and Afghanistan and when one stands by the rights of the oppressed Palestinian people," he was quoted as saying by the Mehr news agency.
Aagot Valle, a lawmaker for the Socialist Left party who joined the Nobel committee this year, said she hoped the selection would be viewed as "support and a commitment for Obama."
"And I hope it will be an inspiration for all those that work with nuclear disarmament and disarmament," she told AP in a rare interview. Members of the committee usually speak only through its chairman.
The peace prize was created partly to encourage ongoing peace efforts, but Obama's efforts are at far earlier stages than those of past winners, and the committee acknowledged they may not bear fruit at all.
"If everything goes wrong, then one cannot say that this was because of Barack Obama," Jagland said. "It could be that it is because of us, all the others, that didn't respond. But I cannot exclude that Barack Obama also can contribute to the eventual failure."
In Europe and much of the world, Obama is praised for bringing the U.S. closer to mainstream global thinking on such issues as climate change and multilateralism. A 25-nation poll of 27,000 people released in July by the Pew Global Attitudes Project found double-digit boosts to the percentage of people viewing the U.S. favorably in countries around the world. That indicator had plunged across the world under President George W. Bush.
http://www.journal-news.com/news/nation-world-news/obama-says-hes-a-surprised-by-nobel-prize-too-338923.html?showComments=true
and more
http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe/10/09/nobel.peace.prize/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe/10/09/nobel.peace.process/index.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
