It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Barack Obama's Nobel Prize is manipulated - Proof

page: 2
15
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 10 2009 @ 09:03 AM
link   
Until Obama won this award I had really NOT seen the hand of the "dreaded" (alleged) "NWO"in a real concrete way. I feel this was a "JIC" for Obama.
I find it fascinating that they knew,(TPTB) even back then, that the Olympics, would not be in Chicago, so "they" saved him a "bonus.
The TPTB (whom ever they may be) miscalculated the reaction, it was supposed to elevate Obama, but it turned him into a joke......... Perhaps that was the intent, to force him into Iran to save face.


I feel no mater what else happens, this was a turning point in our history.




posted on Oct, 10 2009 @ 09:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Chance321
Wow, the nobel prize for doing . . . . . ? Doing. . . . . ? Hmmmm, what has he done??? Hey! I got it! The Nobel Prize for spending the most money in the shortest time since elected?


The man has done nothing
Nothing
Nothing


He did NOTHING to deserve to be President.

Change


That's all millions have in their pocket because of this man.

All Hail Obama -- the man who does NOTHING and Gets Everything



posted on Oct, 10 2009 @ 09:33 AM
link   
reply to post by SANTA CLAWS
 


When ya say it out loud like that it's kinda creepy.

it's almost like he is "magical" (mystical?)

Hmm who would ever have such powers???????


in 3 years someone went from no where to President and Noble laureate,
Obama should play the Lotto

"Only in "murica!!"



posted on Oct, 10 2009 @ 09:49 AM
link   
All designed long ago as part of the ploy to cause unrest through disatisfaction and anger and create anarchy which will ultimately lead to.....FEMA Camps.



Thank goodness I live in the back of beyond somewhere other than america.



posted on Oct, 10 2009 @ 02:42 PM
link   
Why exactly did he even win this prize? What peace or good has he brought to the world? He's done nothing.



posted on Oct, 10 2009 @ 05:37 PM
link   
Perhaps everyone in this thread should re-read this statement made earlier . . . .

"Myth: The prize is awarded to recognize efforts for peace, human rights and democracy only after they have proven successful.

Fact: More often, the prize is awarded to encourage those who receive it to see the effort through, sometimes at critical moments."



posted on Oct, 10 2009 @ 06:45 PM
link   
what do Carter, gore and obama have in common
they were democrats and they were or are becoming disliked by the people that elected them.
Carter was one if the most disliked presidents of this country.
we all know what many people think of Gore and his global warming scam.

And so far Obama is not doing very good at repairing the economy.
and his job rating is falling as fast as unemployment is rising.

So far not of them are in the class for will liked presidents and none have done what Ronald Reagan did
A peaceful end to the Cold War. that should have easily got Reagan the Nobel peace prize.
execpt for the fact that Reagan was a republican.
en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Oct, 10 2009 @ 06:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by entermemo
Perhaps everyone in this thread should re-read this statement made earlier . . . .

"Myth: The prize is awarded to recognize efforts for peace, human rights and democracy only after they have proven successful.

Fact: More often, the prize is awarded to encourage those who receive it to see the effort through, sometimes at critical moments."



No need to re-read it. The fact is, the nomination was done by Feb 1. In order for Obama to "see the effort through" there would have to be an "effort" to begin with prior to his presidency let alone after his inauguration.

Obama is a great orator but talk is cheap. Actions speak louder than words.



posted on Oct, 10 2009 @ 07:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee
_ Myth: The prize is awarded to recognize efforts for peace, human rights and democracy only after they have proven successful.

More often, the prize is awarded to encourage those who receive it to see the effort through, sometimes at critical moments.


I agree that they might have given the prize as an incentive for him to do more effort in peace, however i wonder if he just would do the opposite and take it as he is doing everything right and should keep on his path



posted on Oct, 10 2009 @ 07:01 PM
link   
reply to post by PowerSlave
 


Yes, the nomination was made by Feb 1. But he didn't win the peace price by Feb 1. He won it based on stuff he has made after Feb 1 too. They didn't filter out everything the nominees have made after Feb 1.

Btw, Obama apparently "played a key role" in getting this deal set up and signed. It has been dubbed the event of the century.



posted on Oct, 11 2009 @ 10:13 AM
link   
"No need to re-read it. The fact is, the nomination was done by Feb 1".

The review process lasted from March till August. He wasn't chosen to win on Feb 1st.



posted on Oct, 12 2009 @ 09:48 PM
link   
Funny soon as he wins it,he turns around and sends no telling how many more troops to afghanistan lol.Peace will never =WAR



posted on Oct, 12 2009 @ 09:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Hellmutt
 


Other than sending H. Clinton for the photo-op, how, exactly was Obama involved? He wasn't even present.



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 05:01 AM
link   
reply to post by trey85
 


He didn't start that war (Bush did). Maybe he has found out that the best way to win the peace at this point is to not withdraw the troops?



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 07:00 PM
link   
Is it possible that this Nobel was meant for McCain, and when he didn't win, the agenda behind it had to be quickly switched over to Obama?

Since the elite agenda behind obviously has more to do with the prize than the president himself, it seems possible to me that they were confident that McCain would be elected, and had to rush in "plan b" in all it's ugliness and seeming absurdity.



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 07:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Sharrow
 


That isn't really proof, but I still agree with you. You make a good point too.



new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 1   >>

log in

join