Well, well, well, it would be interesting if it won. It would join a long list of idiocracy in giving it to Yassar Arafat, Lê ??c Th?, Al Gore and the UN IPCC, Barack Obama, IAEA and Mohammed ElBaradei, Kofi Annan and the UN, and Jimmy Carter.
A Norwegian politician said he has nominated WikiLeaks for a Nobel Peace Prize, citing the website’s contribution to “democracy and freedom of speech” worldwide.
Stortinget parliamentarian Snorre Valen said he nominated WikiLeaks because it has helped “redraw the map of information freedom.”
“Liu Xiabao was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize last year for his struggle for human rights, democracy and freedom of speech in China,” Valen wrote on his blog. “Likewise, WikiLeaks have contributed to the struggle for those very values globally, by exposing (among many other things) corruption, war crimes and torture.”
And all that ignores some of the problems with WikiLeaks. Amnesty International, which has won a Nobel Peace Prize itself, was very concerned over the appearance of names of Afghanistan informers, which WikiLeaks put in danger by publishing their names. The releases put the lives of US citizens and soldiers in danger. They’ve caused strife in the Mid-East. Some have claimed that Wikileaks has helped spur on the Egyptian riots, but, that’s rather nebulous. They released a video of an Apache shooting at jihadis in Baghdad, of which several Reuters photographers were embedded, and WikiLeaks called it intentional murder. The context was completely missing, as was some of the relevant video. Fortunately, others provided the full information.
And let’s not forget these two gems
In 2007 John Young, operator of Cryptome, left his position on the WikiLeaks Board of Directors accusing the group of being a “CIA conduit”. Young subsequently retreated from his assertion but has continued to be critical of the site. In a 2010 interview with CNET.com Young accused the group of a lack of transparency regarding their fundraising and financial management. He went on to state his belief that WikiLeaks could not guarantee whistleblowers the anonymity or confidentiality they claimed and that he “would not trust them with information if it had any value, or if it put me at risk or anyone that I cared about at risk.”
Citing the leaking of the sorority rituals of Alpha Sigma Tau, Steven Aftergood has opined that WikiLeaks “does not respect the rule of law nor does it honour the rights of individuals.” Aftergood went on to state that WikiLeaks engages in unrestrained disclosure of non-governmental secrets without compelling public policy reasons and that many anti-corruption activists were opposed to the site’s activities.
While WikiLeaks has, at times, released some information that needs to be in the public domain, they seem to care little for the rights and privacy of individuals, and are more concerned with looking cool and awesome. They’ve also engaged in blackmail, threatening to release more information if anyone tries to stop them. So, all in all, a perfect choice for the modern Nobel Peace Prize.