(Link in case anyone doesn't know who she is or hasn't read up on current events):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malala_YousafzaiI tend to agree with you, Black Sword. In reading up on the subject, I noticed she was nominated by Desmond Tutu (a Nobel Laureate himself) for the International Childrens' Peace Prize, and was the recipient of the Pakistan Youth Peace Prize not long after (this was before the assassination attempt). For someone of only fifteen years, she's done far more than I have in my 25-year lifetime in terms of activism and trying to raise awareness of the corruption of Taliban's thoecracy.
I'd go so far as to say that she's done more (it should be obvious) than Henry Kissinger, Barack Obama, or the E.U., who received the Nobel Prize for "trying" to end the war in Vietnam (Kissinger); "for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples" (Obama); and for being a "good group of countries" (E.U.). At least Le Duc Tho had the decency to decline it, citing that leading a war isn't justification for that type of honor.
If we look at other Nobel laureates, however, we see a different, more justified trend: Al Gore has spent decades working for a climate change initiative. Jimmy Carter's foreign relations extended well past his presidency. And several laureates have been awarded the prize in absentia, because they were being held prisoner for political reasons. I think Ms. Yousafzai fits in well with the latter group, and I beg anyone with an opposing viewpoint to come forward, let's hear any reason this young woman should
not be at least considered for the Prize.
