Skip navigation

To Whom It May Concern:

Dear Sirs / Madams,

while the Norwegian Nobel Committee emphasizes the Nominee’s vision of a world free from nuclear arms as its main motivation for awarding the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize to US President Barack Hussein Obama, and cites his appeal that «Now is the time for all of us to take our share of responsibility for a global response to global challenges», it seems to me that these arguments are in clear breach of the very first paragraph in the Statutes for the Nobel Foundation – §1 – and its very first sentence, which reads:

«The whole of my remaining realizable estate shall be dealt with in the following way: the capital, invested in safe securities by my executors, shall constitute a fund, the interest on which shall be annually distributed in the form of prizes to those who, during the preceding year, shall have conferred the greatest benefit to mankind.»

My emphasis is on the words «during the preceding year», which in this case was the year 2008. All the five Nobel Prizes for 2009 are correctly awarded for work done in 2008 – except, it seems, for the Peace Prize, as we shall see.

Firstly, the announcement from the Norwegian Nobel Committee talks about «Obama as President» and lists what the Nominee has done for the cause of peace «as President». However, the Nominee only became US President on January 20, 2009, so these motivations are in fact not valid.

Secondly, the announcement from the Norwegian Nobel Committee talks about the Nominee’s vision of a world free from nuclear arms. But again, this motivation is in fact not valid, as the Nominee’s vision was announced as late as September 24, 2009, just days before the announcement from the Norwegian Nobel Committee.

And thirdly, the Nominee’s appeal that «Now is the time for all of us to take our share of responsibility for a global response to global challenges» also fails to qualify as a motivation for the Nobel Peace Prize, as these words were first uttered by the Nominee at the United Nations on September 23, 2009.

Conclusion: As the motivations of the Norwegian Nobel Committee for awarding the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize to the Nominee – as stated in its announcement of October 9, 2009 – are all invalid as per the very first sentence of the very first paragraph in the Statutes for the Nobel Foundation, I hereby urge you to annul the October 9 announcement from the Norwegian Nobel Committee and award the Peace Prize for 2009 to someone who in 2008 actually has done a great job for peace, and who actually has conferred the greatest benefit to mankind.

Sincerely,
Torstein Viddal
Oslo, Norway.

6 Comments

    • tommoriarty
    • Posted 12. oktober 2009 at 5.42
    • Permalink

    Check out the President’s reaction when he learned that he had won the Nobel Prize.

    Best Regards
    PoliticalPen

    • EnoughAlready
    • Posted 12. oktober 2009 at 13.30
    • Permalink

    There are those in the USA that will not be satisfied of Obama unless he commits suicide on national TV. Many call themselves patriots. They are really hate mongers and bigots. He won it! Deal with it.

  1. Much more than staying on a French Castle

    the Nobel Prize is very special and President Barack Hussein Obama deserves it

  2. Torstein,
    Jeg har satt opp denne posten på The People’s Voice idag, i nyhetsseksjonen på forsiden.
    :-) Ragnar

    http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/TPV3/index.php

  3. Bra, Torstein at du har formulert dette brevet! Du har helt rett. Denne tildelingen er ikke i pakt med statuttene. Min kommentar til selve pristildelingen følger:

    «A terrible, terrible choice! Mr. Obama, the stooge of the global financial elite, has continued where Mr. Bush left off, and he also has intensified the US attacks on Pakistan. On top of this, he is now contemplating an unlawful and completely unwarranted, preemptive attack on Iran. It’s hard to think of anyone who deserves this prize less than the monster that is Obama. If the Nobel committee in its unfathomable stupidity thinks that this will stop this glib and smug Frankenstein from faithfully executing the sinister agenda of the global elite, they are badly mistaken. If however the committee did this under orders from the same evil elite, the members of the committee are shockingly corrupt. In any case, the Nobel Peace prize has now been ruined for all time. -The damage is irreparable.»

    http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/TPV3/index.php

    • Vidd
    • Posted 11. desember 2009 at 19.48
    • Permalink

    Litt støtte fra uventet hold idag, NRK-veteranen Geir Helljesen:

    Hva mener egentlig Nobelkomiteen?

    http://www.nrk.no/nyheter/nobels_fredspris/1.6906966

    Kommentar: Geir Helljesen

    Uavhengig av hvem som fikk prisen reiser Thorbjørn Jagland i sin tale til Barack Obama et interessant prinsipielt spørsmål. I Alfred Nobels testamente står det bl.a. «prisbeløning åt den som under det forlupna året hafvda gjort menskligheten den størsta nytta.»

    At Nobelkomiteen mener det er Barack Obama har den selvsagt sin fulle rett til, og den fastholder at det var et riktig valg.

    «Brorskap mellom nasjonene»

    I sin tale (den norske oversettelsen fra Nobelstiftelsen) sa Jagland:» Komiteens utgangspunkt er alltid Alfred Nobels testamente. Vi skal tildele Nobels Fredspris til den som i det «foregående år» , altså i dette tilfellet siden forrige utdeling i desember 2008, har virket mest og best «for brorskap mellom nasjonene, for avskaffelse eller reduksjon av stående armeer samt for avholdelse og fremme av fredskongresser»- slik det står i testamentet.

    Spørsmålet var ganske enkelt. Hvem har gjort mest for fred i verden i det siste året. Dersom spørsmålet blir stilt slik Nobel gjorde det, blir svaret forholdsvis enkelt: Det måtte bli USAs president Barack Obama.» Slik ordla Jagland seg.

    Thorbjørn Jagland snakker her både om det «foregående» året og om det «siste» året.Betyr de to uttrykkene det samme, og er begge identiske med uttrykker «det forlupna året»?

    «Foregående året»

    Dersom tiden fra 10. desember 2008 fram til 10.desember 2009 er det «foregående året» hva er da «inneværende år»?

    Og dersom Jagland mener det han bokstavelig sier vil det måtte innebære at alle eksterne forslagstillere, som skulle levere forslag til Nobel fredspris for 2009 innen utgangen av januar måned i 2009, måtte forholde seg til det som hadde skjedd mellom 10.desember 2008 og utgangen av januar 2009.

    Kan det være meningen? Trengs det for komiteens framtidige arbeid en avklaring eller presisering av begreper?

    At vi fikk oppleve en festlig og interessant prisutdelingsseremoni var godt for alle, men det forandrer ikke på behovet for klarhet i forhold til tolkning av Nobels testamente.


4 Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. […] Formal Complaint about the Awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to Barack Obama « Vidd viddal.wordpress.com/2009/10/12/formal-complaint-about-the-awarding-of-the-nobel-peace-prize-to-barack-obama – view page – cached Formal Complaint about the Awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to Barack Obama — From the page […]

  2. […] not accept the prize. Jagland was recently elected Secretary General of the Council of Europe. One blogger has written a formal complaint to the committee on his blog, and a Swedish blogger, Åsa […]

  3. […] I’ve already pointed out very thorughly, all the motivations given from the Nobel Committee for awarding Mr Obama the Peace Prize are 100% […]

  4. […] Formal Complaint about the Awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to Barack Obama […]

Legg igjen en kommentar

Fyll inn i feltene under, eller klikk på et ikon for å logge inn:

WordPress.com-logo

Du kommenterer med bruk av din WordPress.com konto. Logg ut / Endre )

Twitter picture

Du kommenterer med bruk av din Twitter konto. Logg ut / Endre )

Facebookbilde

Du kommenterer med bruk av din Facebook konto. Logg ut / Endre )

Google+ photo

Du kommenterer med bruk av din Google+ konto. Logg ut / Endre )

Kobler til %s