DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**Clielldub** · 03-02-2007, 02:50 PM

I don't think that's exactly the way it is to be interpreted. In terms of peace, I would consider global concerns to be the actions of hostile people who put part or all of the world in danger, in terms of war and such.

From a quote in an earlier post on the Nobel Committee:

First, although the Norwegian Nobel Committee never formally defined "peace," in practice it came to interpret the term ever more broadly. This approach could have its pitfalls, but avoided the danger of locking the committee into fixed categories and gave the committee flexibility to adapt to new concerns. I can't speak for the Nobel Committee, but perhaps the same broad interpretation of "peace" that they may have used in Gore's nomination was also used in Limbaugh's? I'm sure that anyone nominated is worthy of consideration.

03-02-2007, 02:50 PM	#37
Clielldub Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 518 Senior Member	I don't think that's exactly the way it is to be interpreted. In terms of peace, I would consider global concerns to be the actions of hostile people who put part or all of the world in danger, in terms of war and such. From a quote in an earlier post on the Nobel Committee: First, although the Norwegian Nobel Committee never formally defined "peace," in practice it came to interpret the term ever more broadly. This approach could have its pitfalls, but avoided the danger of locking the committee into fixed categories and gave the committee flexibility to adapt to new concerns. I can't speak for the Nobel Committee, but perhaps the same broad interpretation of "peace" that they may have used in Gore's nomination was also used in Limbaugh's? I'm sure that anyone nominated is worthy of consideration.
	Quote