The Nobel Peace Prize is perhaps the most important award of its kind. In fact the next important prize awarded for peace achievements is not even second to the Nobel peace prize, but rather trails behind it to the 12th or even the twentieth rank in importance, as nothing is as important as the Nobel Prize. Moreover, the President of the United States, regardless of whether it is the dim-witted George W. Bush in that post or the clever President Barack Obama, is the leader of the free world. The West have pledged allegiance to America as their leader following the Great War, and then renewed their allegiance after the Second World War. No other country has risen up to challenge and compete with America's leadership in the West, and after the collapse of the communist bloc in the late eighties, there was none left in the world to compete with the United States. As we all know, President Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize. While this was welcomed by many, several others attacked both the President and the Prize: On one hand, the American left is not very fond of the President as he is yet to end the wars started by Bush, and on the other hand, the American right pathologically hates Obama, since the latter prefers diplomacy over war. Before I continue, I want to set the record straight concerning an issue that interests me more than any other debate regarding the Nobel Peace Prize: In the course of the attacks aimed at Obama or the Nobel Prize, I read some very offensive statements about the late Yasser Arafat, may he rest in peace. I want to say here that Abu Ammar is more decent that all those who criticize him, and all the successive governments in Israel, and the terrorists who led them. In fact, I feel that I am insulting the memory of the late Palestinian president just by comparing him to those fascist thieves. Nahum Barnea, who is usually moderate and liberal, (and perhaps this is the first time I ever object to something he wrote), said in Yedioth Ahronoth that in the long history of the prize, it has been given sometimes to people who did not deserve it, and that the most insulting example of the previous generation was Yasser Arafat, but that there were many others, including Kissinger, Gorbachev, and the former North Vietnamese leader Le Duc Tho. But the most insulting example in the history of the Nobel Peace Prize was when it was awarded to the terrorist Menachem Begin, the war criminal who shared the prize with the late President Anwar Sadat in 1978. Equally despicable is when the professional conman Shimon Perez shared the Nobel Peace Prize with Arafat and Yitzhak Rabin in 1994. When one delves into an issue, one should be prepared to hear facts that he may not like. As such, I want to say that Abu Ammar's shoe sole is more decent than them all, from Ben-Gurion to Benjamin Netanyahu himself today. The aforementioned deliberate insult notwithstanding, there still is an actual history to which we are witnesses. While Abu Ammar took the path of peace, the Jews assassinated Yitzhak Rabin, and his killer is now a hero in prison. The peace process slumped next with the impostor Netanyahu. Nonetheless, Abu Ammar had agreed on Clinton's parameters, as I directly heard him say along with President Clinton. I was in fact in Abu Ammar's suite at the Seehof Hotel in Davos when Dr. Saeb Erekat arrived from Taba on the 28th of January, 2001 carrying maps under his arm. He said that a final accord has been agreed upon with the Israelis, and that only minor final touches remained to be made. I have written about this before, and I repeat it today, and the witnesses to this, along with Brother Erekat, are Brother Sabih Masri and Mr. James Wolfensohn, who are very well alive, leaving no room for lies about this. But what happened after that? The Israelis elected the war criminal Ariel Sharon as their Prime Minister on 6/2/2001, and completely wrecked the peace process. In both times, it was the Israelis who wrecked the peace process, and not Yassir Arafat. Had they continued in the path of peace with Rabin, Barnea's son would probably be alive today instead of having been killed in the bus bombing in 1996, and if they hadn't voted for Sharon, thousands of Palestinian women, children and men would have been alive instead of having been killed by the fascist occupation army. I also reiterate the above to Ms. Minette Marrin, the columnist at the Sunday Times. While she is usually also moderate, she chose to say in commenting on Obama being awarded the Nobel Peace Prize that there is nothing reliably noble about the Nobel Prize. According to Ms. Marrin, many of the people who ought to have won it didn't, and several who certainly shouldn't have won it did, such as Yasser Arafat and Le Duc Tho. In addition, I want to add – to everything I said while commenting on Barnea's views, and which I repeated to Ms. Marrin – that Le Duc Tho shared the Nobel Peace Prize with Henry Kissinger, who are both war criminals, for their role in negotiating a peace accord in Vietnam in 1973. In any case, this accord did not last, and the war was resumed until the Americans were defeated and fled from the rooftop of their Embassy in Saigon. Who does Marrin propose for the Nobel Prize? Should it be Tony Blair, who, along with George W. Bush, forged false justifications for the invasion of Iraq which killed a million innocent Iraqis, and which is still killing Iraqis? Or should it be Nick Griffin, the leader of the British National Party? In the years that have passed since I became politically aware, Martin Luther King won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1964, followed by the UNICEF in 1965, Amnesty International in 1977, Mother Teresa in 1979, the Reverend Desmond Tutu in 1984, Nelson Mandela in 1993, Médecins Sans Frontières in 1999 and Jimmy Carter in 2002. Each of the above have well deserved the Nobel Peace Prize, and perhaps Barnea and Marrin have read Tutu and Carter's opinions regarding Israel's treatment of the Palestinians under occupation, and the Israeli wall of segregation and their new apartheid being enforced by a government and an army whose members are afraid of travelling abroad for fear of being prosecuted for their war crimes. I continue tomorrow.
