I received a chain e-mail about Irena Sendler, an unacknowledged heroine of World War II. Ms. Sendler saved the lives of more than 2,500 Jews (mostly children) until she was caught and tortured by Nazis. Even after WWII, she tried to reunite the children with their families.
Hers is a touching story that was destined to make its way to Hollywood, but the gist of the e-mail was this: Irena Sendler was looked over for the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007 in favor of Al Gore who won for… “a slide show on Global Warming”.
As you may know, I am not a fan of chain e-mails and I approach them with great incredulity. The friend who forwarded this message was smart and kind enough to provide a link to the Snopes.com page confirming the story as true.
True, the story may be, but it bothers me when people accept statements as fact, or stories as truth, without questioning the Source or the Motive. I spoke to the outraged friend who sent the chain e-mail, explaining:
“I am unclear as to why the anonymous author is attacking Al Gore for winning the Nobel Peace Prize instead of attacking the Nobel Prize Committee for not nominating Irena Sendler. And nominating her sooner…say, at any time since the 60 years after World War II ended.
“Mahatma Gandhi and Pope John Paul II did not win the Peace Prize either, though both were nominated several times. No offense to Ms. Sendler, but it seems like they should be a little higher on the fake ‘moral outrage’ list.”
To me, this is a key difference between “People” and “Sheeple”.
“Sheeple” read a compelling story like Ms. Sendler’s and accept it all-inclusively. They are (as the author of the chain-email intended) outraged by the injustice of it. They immediately forward it to their friends without a second thought, perpetuating a chain of ignorance.
“People”, on the other hand (unlike Sheeple), pause and are inquisitive about what others ignore. “Why is the author anonymous?”, People ask. “What is the motive behind this message?” I was unable to find answers to those questions with the Irena Sendler chain, but rather than add more links, I did the proper thing with this circa 2007 message still making its rounds: I deleted it.
If I had to venture a guess, it would be this:
The author is part of a political agenda to smear Democrats. I am not a fan of either Democrats or Republicans (to me, they are the same Party), but I have no tolerance for even slimier people running their slimy under-handed campaigns. Whatever outrage there is over Ms. Sendler’s Nobel snub, it is clearly phony.
There is no correlation between Al Gore winning the Peace Prize and Irena Sendler being nominated.
A quick search on the history of the Nobel Peace Prize will point out that Ms. Sendler, despite her humanitarian efforts and moving life story, probably should not have qualified to be voted for the prize in the first place.
Alfred Nobel, the creator of the prize, stated in his will, the Peace Prize should go to the party who:
“…shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses.”
I think Irena Sendler deserves recognition and perhaps a larger place in the footnotes of history, since neither I nor probably you, had ever heard of her before now, but I do not think Ms. Sendler met Nobel’s criteria for the Peace Prize.
More to the point, it can not be confirmed that she was, indeed, nominated, as the nominations are held secret for fifty years after the prize is awarded. There is only an allegation that a nominator revealed her inclusion to the public (at least, as far as I could tell, it is only an allegation).
I made a modicum of effort to look into this. The author did not make any effort, or hoped you wouldn’t. I’m sure that is the way they would like to keep it, too. It is much easier to prey on the ignorance of Sheeple than to try to sway real-life thinking People.
What I want you to take-away from this post is:
- Question what you are told.
- Question what you feel.
- Question what you believe.
- Question the source.
- Question the motive.
- Question your questions.
See a pattern there?
Please do not forward chain-mails.
If you agree or disagree with something you read and think it is important enough to interrupt the lives of others with, then do your research, formulate your own thoughts about it, and send that out. Even if you are not an elegant writer or speaker, at least the thoughts you forward will be yours, a product of YOUR mind and YOUR effort, and YOUR intellect, not someone else’s.
Think about that.
Very well written, sheeple, yes, I agree. Oddly enough when I read the original chain mail all I could think was, would I have had the courage to save one life? Maybe I better just start by holding the door for someone or giving out an extra smile. I hate how people make the worlds problems about others. Really the problem with the world starts with us taking chain mails like this one to see the strength and courage of women (or men) like this and make it our own. I doubt she needed someone to tell her or give her a prize…
Thanks. “I doubt she needed someone to tell her or give her a prize…” –I couldn’t agree with that more.
Another interesting fact is that since the end of WWII, the Nobel Committee chose not to award the prize in 6 different years: 1948, 1955, 1956, 1966, 1967 & 1972.
I’m certainly not a fan of either Gore or Obama, but the email story is about denigrating Gore & Obama more than anything else. The outrage, if any were truly warranted, should be directed toward the Nobel Committee.
a friend sent me the email 6 or 7 months ago. i sent back this response:
“did u notice the sneaky way the writer politicized this heartwarming story? the fact that obama and gore won the nobel peace prize is juxtaposed with the fact that this heroic lady did not, along with mentions of ACORN and global warming, in order to produce resentment of democrats, liberals, community organizers, environmentalists, internationalists, etc. that’s why i have no respect for RWNJ propagandists.”
i just saw it on facebook monday. it had 2 bylines: “By: Morgun Powder” and “By: Diane Sori”. both have facebook pages. the one whose name sounds like “more gunpowder” talks about his glock, his horse, and “obama’s death panels”, among other things. the other name, tho it sounds like “die and sorry”, may be real, as there is a diane sori involved in local politics in florida. whether that’s her or not, the diane sori connected with the story seems to be a birther, anti-immigrant, t-party, take back america type, who likes fox news, hannity, and the heritage foundation, and is a fan of allen west.
Pleeese! You expect people to respect your comment when you don’t even know how and when to capitalize? C’mon!
Someone on my Facebook recently posted this story with the part about Al Gore and Obama, and it’s unclear who won the year she was nominated.
Then it says, “Now, more than ever, with Iran, and others, claiming the HOLOCAUST to be ‘a
myth’. It’s imperative to make sure the world never forgets, because there are
others who would like to do it again.”
Then I went to do some research and found there was a chain email that had been circulating since at least 2007, that claimed the UK had stopped teaching about the Holocaust in their schools to avoid offending their Muslim population, which, according to Snopes, is false.
Then, to isolate Iran, as somehow world leaders of Holocaust denial is just all kinds of wrong.
We shouldn’t forget the Holocaust, but it’s disrespectful to exploit it to push your anti-Iran or anti-Obama or anti-Al Gore agenda in a chain letter.
Thanks for the update! It is surprising (and a little disappointing) how long-lived this chain mail is.
I have received the Sendler e-mail forward several times over the past 2-3 years. Right away, the first time, I thought it incongruous that Al Gore was put down. I thought that the snide slur on Gore was totally unnecessary in order to honor Sendler. A day ago, I again received the forward. This time, from a friend who is ordinarily skeptical and scrupulous about checking facts, the friend having received it from his son, who also is usually skeptical and could run intellectual circles around many of us.
I was surprised when I got it. This time, Obama had been added to the end comment. Each time I got this, I replied that the put downs did not go with the main message. So today my friend sent me your article. Thanks for calling people on this nonsense.
Thanks for reading it, Sally! The Obama twist is a new one, but not surprising. We are flooded with so much information so fast these days that it can be easier to accept as truth something that sounds plausible rather than doing the (usually boring and tedious) work to check facts and make logical judgments on the information presented. Nice job catching the incongruent nature of the article right away. That’s what led me to check it out more thoroughly myself.
I, too, received this email and thought it sounded fishy. It is one of many I seem to receive every week – always against Obama/Democrats. I don’t recall ever having received this many before, i.e. Bush/Cheney/Republicans. Therefore, I conclude that it is all part of the demonization of our president and the absolute determination to make him a “one-term” president.
I am an Independent and do not vote exclusively for one party. However, the mean-spirited, nastiness of the republicans has more or less convinced me that I will vote for Obama in 2012 as I did before. I wonder how many other Independents are feeling the same way?
Mary, you’re probably a liberal and school teacher to boot. Obama and Gore are both charlatans and are exposed as such. If you weren’t a group think advocate and a sheep you’d admit this and see the harm these idiots truly do. But as a moron probably, and elitist surely you fail to see the point. Question that.
rich, you — like your fan david — need to improve your reading comprehension.
I too received the email and I certainly DID question it’s authenticity, so I researched and found that the woman in question was indeed a remarkable humanitarian. You outline the standards for the Nobel Peace Prize, stating that this Irene woman probably didn’t qualify anyway. Here’s a question for you …. How does promoting the idea of a global warming catastrophe meet the standards? Does offer evidence that Al Gore
“…shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses.”
Just a question you might want to consider.
Thanks for the comment, Dee. Why should I want to consider it? I’m not arguing that Al Gore (or anyone else) should have received the prize, only that Irena Sendler did not actually qualify for it in the first place. That does not take away any of her accomplishments. She could have qualified for many other awards, prizes, or forms of recognition.
Right on Rich. This women is more qualified to have received the Nobel Peace Prized than both Gore or Obama. She did a great service towards her fellow man than both of them included. They are not qualified to sit in the same circle with her.
david, you need to improve your reading comprehension.
I just received this email and was upset as well that it tries to put down two people, democrats (Gore and Obama). Celebrate her and not degrade others! Also, as I researched her one requirement for the prize was not met. The fact that her accomplishments did not occur within the last two years, a requirement!
So check facts and stop being sheep!
The fact to question is always good from my point of view, but i don’t agree with ur conclusion, it’s still good for people to know about what this woman did, and what u say about the requirement for nobel prize is from my point of view not ritght at all.
Cause Al Gore has done NOTHING at all for “fraternity between nations”, and that’s the cas of many people who’ve get this so criticized now nobel prize, when people like arafat get it, that means a lot,…
So, yes, the man who create this mail has certainly political view, and what ?
Is what he said true or not ?
Yes the story of this woman deserve to be learnt, so, even if the author has political interest in this, i will send this mail to my contacts, cause them too deserve to learn about this woman.
Have a nice day o/
Thank you for this article. Well done.
Very well said. The beauty of researching these chain e-mails is that you learn something, and it is almost always more accurate than what you learned (or thought you learned) from the initial e-mail. Thanks for a voice of reason in a world of often biased emotion.
Hi Judy. Thanks. You make an interesting point. Maybe chain e-mails ARE good for something….
Your comment thanks the author of this article for “a voice of reason in a world of often biased emotion.” Hummmmmmmm …. you don’t see any bias in his article? Keep learning.
Again, thanks for commenting, Dee, but again, I never implied my article was not biased. What is it that you feel I should keep learning, exactly?