It has been revealed that “Tookie” Williams, co-founder of the Crips street gang has been nominated for the 2001 Nobel Peace Prize. It seems that “Tookie” has been active in good works since landing on death row for murdering four people.
How is it that “Tookie” is up for a Nobel, when Mumia Abu-Jamal only murdered one person (and a lousy cop at that), and he can’t even get his own guest shot on National Public Radio? This is grossly unfair.
Maybe it isn’t too late for Charlie Manson to get an image upgrade (and parole), maybe by endowing a breast cancer survivors group.
True, he’s made mistakes, but haven’t we all??
I can’t recall a four year span in my history classes where there wasn’t people fighting somewhere. All Nobel Peace Prizes should be revoked and no new ones issued until people quit fighting. Maybe I’m a little skewed on this point, but there’s an old bromide that “Nobody wants wars, so why do they keep happening?” Obviously the premise was flawed. People DO want wars. Hence, these Nobel Prize winners are just patting already peaceful societies on the back.
I’ll tell you how to stop wars. Go capitalist. War is a threat to a strong economy because it shifts imports and exports, changes business cash flow, and so on. But if you think poor societies don’t have anything to gain from wars, you’d be wrong again. They don’t have much to lose.
I guess the people who vote for the prize feel that his work has merit. They gave it to Yasir Arafat not so long ago so why not someone guilty of multiple murder.
What has Mumia Done to deserve a nomination? And what’s up with that “lousy cop” comment?
Killed a lousy cop huh? Anyone who thinks Mumia Abu-Jamal is a hero needs a big wake up call. He’s a criminal and a murderer. There must be a black man somewhere out there just a little more worthy of respect than Mumia.
As for you, I do hope the need never arises that one day you will need a “lousy cop” to come to your assistance.
I also doubt very seriously that Tookie stands a real chance of winning the Nobel Peace Prize.
Sometimes a foolish mindset can be best exposed by lampooning it in the proper context. The people who have placed Mumia Abu-Jamal on a pedestal place little value on a policeman’s life…hence the “lousy cop” comment, which does not express my view at all.
Tookie’s Nobel nomination demonstrates a similar disregard for human life. His supporters go on about how he’s made “mistakes”. Since we have gay rights groups up in arms over “Dr.” Laura Schlesinger’s supposedly calling homosexuals “mistakes”, it’s suprising there’s not more of an uproar over calling murder victims “mistakes”.
What exactly is your point? that the guy, having been convicted of multiple murders should simply admit he’s a bad guy and never try and do anything positive? and what benefit would be derived from this stance?
As spooje pointed out, this guy is sitting in a jail cell, and making some active attempt to reduce the number of others who end up there. This is something you wish to deride? Why in the world would you want to negate an attempt by anyone to convince kids to stay away from gangs and crime?
Or is the ‘debate’ about “gee, there’s some really bad guys in prison”? In which case, I’d think it belongs in the “duh” category.
Or is your point that you don’t think the person in question deserves the prize? Ok, fine, you’re entitled to your opinion, I’m sure the committee will value it as well.
I dunno wring. I happen to think it would be a travesty if the Nobel Peace Prize is given to Tookie. The guy started the Crips, one of the most violent gangs ever to breathe LA smog, was convicted of 4 murders and suspected of over 20 more, and he gets nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize? I am not saying that he deserves no recognition for his actions, but this particular recognition should be denied him.
The NPP is, or is perceived to be at least, the brass ring of humanitarian awards. Gandhi, the prime mover in nonviolent protest, was nominated five times and never received it. Yet we have former terrorists like Arafat (and I’ve heard Begin and Rabin’s names thrown in as well) receiving this award. IMHO, (and I know exactly what that is worth unfortunately) this award should go to people who demonstrate a longtime, serious commitment to peace, not murderers or terrorists who decide to play nice when it becomes advantageous to do so. Look at Arafat’s recent moves to ensure peace f’rinstance.
Pthalis as I said, you’re entitled to your opinion.
My main points was the OP with the “yea, let’s award stuff to Manson”
Whatever horrible things this guy has done in his life, (and I’ll grant you all of your points about how bad), the point to me is that, right now, he’s making some real attempt to make a positive change in other people’s lives.
Does this excuse his prior acts? no. Does it make him a safe risk for parole? no. Should he be released to do further good works? no. Should his attempts to do something good be ridiculed? IMHO no. Should his attempts to do something good and leave something positive behind be discounted because of his prior bad acts? again, IMHO, no. As a matter of fact, because of his prior bad acts, he’s in a unique position to positively affect his target audience.
Many folks have attempted to convince youths in those urban areas that gangs are not the way out, that there IS a way out at all etc. But here you have some one who was there, started a gang, and ** now** says “it was the worst decision I’ve made, and led to all these horrible things”. It may hold more vailidity for the target audience.
Speaking of which, does anyone remember Karla Faye (Born to Kill, oops, Born Again) Tucker? I’ll bet her followers are gnashing their teeth because they didn’t think of this Nobel nomination dodge. Karla brought comfort to a lot of people, when she wasn’t stabbing and hacking at them.
I don’t begruge Tookie his shot at a small measure of atonement for offing at least four people (note: his acts go a little beyond “bad things”). He should have an opportunity to perform good works, right up until the time of his execution.
And maybe the Swedes can think about whether the opportunity to tweak the U.S. over the death penalty is worth perverting their award to this extent.
Being nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize isn’t like being nominated for an Oscar. It isn’t an honor in itself. Someone out there obviously thinks each nominee deserves the prize, but that person could be certifiably insane. Hell, Hitler was nominated. Repeatedly.
Sounds like y’all have a bone to pick with Mario Fehr (the Swiss MP who nominated him), and not, in this case, the award itself.
As an aside, Nobel’s will specified people who arrange peace conferences as an example of those who should receive the Peace Prize; he didn’t mention those who work for human rights or social justice. So some of the most unpopular awards, like the one given to Kissinger, are actually most in keeping with the term’s of Nobel’s will.
Actually, by organizing a large and powerful gang, he probably saved some lives. Which city is going to have more violence - one with several gangs competing for turf or one with one gang that controls the drug trade?
I lived in a mostly poor east Texas town of about 25,000 people. It had the unfortunate honor of repeatedly having the highest per capita murder rate in the state, once two years in a row - the town was about 50 miles from Dallas and had a disproportionately large drug economy and a good portion of the murders were drug-related. A few years back the Crips moved in and started recruiting. There were no other major gangs, and now they are the only gang, even a local biker gang that moved a lot of crank cooked up in the labs surrounding the nearby Lake Tawakoni moved out - and now the murder rate has dropped. All the big dealers are associated with the Crips now, and there is no real competition. There is less violence now because of a strong gang presence.
