Well, as much as I respect President Obama (I voted for him), the Nobel Committee's decision to award him the peace prize exposes the annual prize-giving for what it is: a farcical exercise. If prizes were to be given for intentions and not for achievements, as Mr. Fomenko claims, then again, Obama would have to wait a long time before deserving a peace prize. He hasn't achieved a single peaceful transaction yet. Not only that. He is involved in two wars and might even start a third one if some of his warmonger advisors get their way. Mr. Obama is leading sanctions against Iran. Can he tell the world for what reason? Is this an act of peace or a threat of non-peaceful intentions? Has he produced any evidence that Iran is preparing to manufacture nuclear weapons? Yet he appears to be following the footsteps of President Bush in the lead-up to the Iraq war. Sanctions are acts of war, not acts of peace. Iran has not, and is not, threatening any country, notwithstanding the refrains of certain sectors in the United States. Why would't the Nobel Peace Committee consider such names as Medvedev, Putin, Ju Hintao? Or, for that matter, Chavez, Gaddafy, Ahmadinedjad. All these leaders have not only expressed peaceful intentions, but have tangibly worked to bring their intentions into fruition. And, unlike the United States, they are threatening no other country. Then again, when I think of people like Begin, Perez, Kissinger who have also received the same prize in the past, I feel nothing but contempt for this vacuous annual festival.