O.K. don’t get me wrong. I really like Barak Obama. I think he might turn out a much better leader than anyone suspected, but don’t you think that giving him the Nobel Peace prize is a bit of an over kill. You don’t give a prize for something somebody might achieve, you give it for real achevements. Mother Teresa was awarded it for her humanitarian work, Al Gore for his enlightenment and work on saving the planet, Sadat and Begin for their brave peace treaty (Sadat paid for t with his life). Mandela, Tutu and Martn Luther King were all deserving laureates. But what has Obama done already to advance world peace? Give him a year or two to show what he’s worth and then the prize would have real meaning. Is the world in such a bad shape that the committee couldn’t find any worthy candidates? In an online article fromTime magazine published today, the writer states that the prize was given primarly for his work and commitment to nuclear disarmement.” But the article goes on to state that “if the Nobel committee wants someday to honor the force that has done most over the past 60 years to end industrial-scale war, they will award a peace prize to the bomb”. They may have a point there.
Anyway as the prize has already been announced, I can only hope and pray that Obama  will stand up and show he is worthy of it.

Google GmailGoogle ReaderLinkedInDiggShare