Shame on the Nobel Committee and Al Gore

[Ranger12 46]

I apologize if this was posted before and I missed it, but I had to sound off about this.

I heard about this lady a couple of days ago and thought there was no way it was true. There was no way that the Noble committee would award a person their Peace Prize to a man who put together a documentary full of theories that is refuted by at least half of the scientific community over a woman who ran an underground that smuggled Jewish children out of Nazi occupied Warsaw, Poland. I researched it and guess what...they did!

This just shows you what this world has come too, especially how the "global warming scare tactics" have apparently skewed the world view and priorities of some of the supposed most intelligent people on this planet. How could Al Gore even accept that award over something like what Irena Sendler did? Shame on him and the Nobel Committee for playing politics and kissing the ass of the environmentalists instead of properly recognizing a true hero of people. Nice to see that Al Gore risked his life to make that documentary.

You would do good to look up more info on this incredible lady. There were plenty more web articles out there about her.

Irena Sendler.org

Her story

In 2007 Al Gore and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change won the Nobel Peace Prize. The runner-up was a lady named Irena Sendler, who died on May 10, 2008. I want to tell you her story.

Sendler was a social worker in Warsaw, Poland when the Germans occupied it in 1939 and herded Jewish citizens into the infamous Warsaw Ghetto (they were later transported to concentration camps). She went in and out of the Ghetto several times a day under the guise of providing humanitarian aid, persuading Jewish parents to entrust their children to her. After smuggling the children out, she found Polish families to “adopt” them until the end of the war, or entrusted them to the protection of Catholic convents. She and her underground movement provided new names and identities to the Jewish children and only she knew their whereabouts. She was ingenious in finding ways to smuggle the children out of the Ghetto, using city sewers, underground tunnels and other routes, hiding them in boxes and suitcases. She even trained a dog to bark in the back of the car so it would stifle the cries of a scared child when they passed through a German checkpoint. Ever wary of German spies and surveillance, she wrote the names of the children, their aliases, and their adopting family on cigarette papers, and buried the papers in jars in her garden.

Eventually the German Gestapo caught her, severely tortured her, and sentenced her to death. Her humanitarian organization saved her by bribing the guards transporting her to her execution. The guards left her in the woods, unconscious and with broken arms and legs, telling superiors they had shot her. She was listed on public bulletin boards as among those who had been executed, so for the remainder of the war she lived in hiding, daring not even to attend her mother’s funeral. She continued her work for the Jewish children, able to walk only with crutches. After the war, she dug up the jars and attempted to find the children and return them to their parents; most of the parents had died at the Treblinka extermination camp. She was, however, able to return almost all of the children to extended family members.

Sendler’s story circulated after the war. In 1965 she was recognized by Israel’s Yad Vashem as a Righteous Among the Nations (Oskar Schindler was also recognized thus). In 2003 she received the Order of the White Eagle, Poland’s highest civilian decoration. In 1999 a high school teacher in Kansas encouraged four of his students to investigate her life; they created a play, “Life in a Jar,” that has had over 240 performances in the United States, Canada and Europe. There are plans for a movie. In my admittedly less-than-thorough investigation, I have found no indication that Irena Sendler was a religious person. Neither was Oskar Schindler. I am reminded of what the apostle Paul writes in Romans 2:14-15, that when non-believers act righteously they are in a sense confirming the image of God in which they have been created and God’s creational predisposition towards justice.

I am wondering how much people will remember global warming fifty years from now (do we remember the “ice age” scares of the 1970’s?). But lives of courage, nobility, love, charity, and sacrifice leave timeless imprints in the world.

[Tiger Al 0]

Mahatma Gandhi never made it, either.

[Ranger12 46]

Mahatma Gandhi never made it, either.

Did Al Gore win it over him also?

[Tiger Al 0]

Mahatma Gandhi never made it, either.

Did Al Gore win it over him also?

No. He was assassinated in 1948. He was nominated 5 times.

[Justin5 20]

I don't agree with it, but I can rationalize their decision.

Look IF you believe what Al Gore is saying (BIG IF), then you can definitely argue that his work could end up saving thousands or more lives. While this woman's story is courageous and amazing, if you are going by potential lives saved and IF!!! you believe Gore's story then.....

I know I'm going to get chastised, and even I don't believe everything Gore said. I'm sure you are all going to get on me, but for those that take him as 100% fact are going to be very stirred by his presentation.

[OldNewby 27]

"This is like deja vu all over again." Yogi Berra

[MDM4AU 337]

The Nobel Prize means no more than an Academy Award or a UN Resolution these days.

[Tiger Al 0]

The Nobel Prize means no more than an Academy Award or a UN Resolution these days.

I'd take one.

[Ranger12 46]

Mahatma Gandhi never made it, either.

Did Al Gore win it over him also?

No. He was assassinated in 1948. He was nominated 5 times.

I am assuming you replying with sarcasm because you understood my reply as sarcasm also, Al.

Justin, I think you hit their mindset right on the head. It explains how wacky all these global warming doom and gloomers have become and how it has screwed up the thinking of what is supposed to be some of the most respected and intelligent people on the planet, the Noble Prize Committee.

Al Gore wins the prize on the presumption he is going to save thousands of lives, regardless of the fact that the theory of global warming is refuted by half the scientists in the world. Like one article I read mentioned, and I also saw this on Penn and Teller's show the other night, back in the 70's we were being told by scientists that we need to prepare for an ice age. It was even on the cover of Time Magazine. Now we are being told to get prepared for melting polar ice caps because of global warming.

So, because Al Gore made a slideshow and a movie based on theory and not fact, let's go ahead and presume him to be a hero and award him over Irena Sedler, whom is already been proved as a hero. Let's ignore the fact that while saving an estimated 2,500 children, she risked her life several times, yet biggest threat Al Gore faced was making sure to not hurt his thumb because of having to push the little button on the projector so many times.

[autiger4life 3]

That is what I don't understand, the NPP isn't supposed to be about number of lives saved. Mother Theresa didn't save near as many lives as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has. MLK Jr. didn't save as many lives as some peace workers, etc. Even if Al Gore will save thousands of lives, so far he has saved none. How do you win a peace prize when we are still waiting to see if any peace will be created. This would be like winning an Academy Award, before the movie is made, or a Grammy before the song is released. It doesn't make sense. And that is all with the assumption that he is right and it saves lives.

[Justin5 20]

That is what I don't understand, the NPP isn't supposed to be about number of lives saved. Mother Theresa didn't save near as many lives as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has. MLK Jr. didn't save as many lives as some peace workers, etc. Even if Al Gore will save thousands of lives, so far he has saved none. How do you win a peace prize when we are still waiting to see if any peace will be created. This would be like winning an Academy Award, before the movie is made, or a Grammy before the song is released. It doesn't make sense. And that is all with the assumption that he is right and it saves lives.

I get that and agree somewhat. But the idea in his video (IN THEIR ARGUMENT) is saving lives. If the video was not made, and no one changed their lives, people would die. (BY HIS ARGUMENT) if you wait to when the problems to start to save the lives, it will already be too late.

[autigeremt 6,970]

The Nobel Prize means no more than an Academy Award or a UN Resolution these days.

I'd take one.

EXACTLY

Just playing.

[Tigermike 3,427]

The Nobel Prize means no more than an Academy Award or a UN Resolution these days.

I'd take one.

And you would be just as deserving as Algore. Maybe more so.

[autiger4life 3]

I get that and agree somewhat. But the idea in his video (IN THEIR ARGUMENT) is saving lives. If the video was not made, and no one changed their lives, people would die. (BY HIS ARGUMENT) if you wait to when the problems to start to save the lives, it will already be too late.

I understand what you mean to say, but here is the problem with that logic. The last part you say that if you wait to when the problems start to save lives, it will be to late. I agree with this. However, the prize is not there to get a person to save lives. It is there to show someone who has created peace. In 50 years Al Gore's video may have created peace, but right now no peace has been created. It is once again like saying that they give me an Academy Award for making a movie before I have made it, but if they don't give it to me before hand, the movie won't be made(and that is assuming it is worth an academy award!) That isn't what the award is for.

Furthermore, there seems to be a misunderstanding in the difference between saving lives and creating peace. The two are not the same.

[Ranger12 46]

First of all, giving somebody an award on presumption over somebody that has already done it is ridiculous and I don't see how it could be justified.

Secondly, lets assume that global warming is real and not just a theory (I think many forget that is all it is right now). Al Gore still would not have been personally responsible for saving thousands of lives. To say so is very silly. There have been many before Al Gore that has been screaming about global warming, so what makes him better then them? Because he did a slide show was was made into a documentary?

So, we are back to one simple matter. Al Gore won a Nobel Peace Prize for narrating a documentary on a highly debated theory which is yet to happen, over a women over a woman who actually did save thousands of lives at the risk of her own life. Yeah, that sounds real logical to me. How anybody can justify that is beyond me.

BTW...going by this logic that the attention he is bringing to global warming, does anybody know if any of the "ice age scientists" of the 70s won a Nobel Peace Prize for their predictions?