Well IOC is in some serious damage control in the months leading up to the 2008 Olypiad in Beijing China.

Calls for a Boycott of these games have been stepped up in the past few days as violence in Tibet has caused depending on who you talk to between 10 and 100 casualties among protestors. Tibet is a former independent country that China invaded and occupied in the 1950's and now claims as part of it's territory.

Just a few weeks ago, Steven Spielberg very public quit as the artistic director for the games citing his disgust with Chinese arms sales to the Sudanese government that later ended up in Darfur. Most of the world hailed the decision, but he was not unexpectedly crucified by the chinese government and the government controled papers in that country.

There is evidence these riots are timed for the Olympics. It is known that pro-tibetian protests are being planned for the torch run, in countries that lack the repressive political structure that is a mainstay of communist china.

International Olympic Committee President Jacques Rogge recently made statements asking countries to reject the notition of boycotting the games in China, saying it will only hurt the athletes. He has also stated that the IOC cannot fix the problems of the world and has asked activist groups not to pressure sponsers from giving money to the games.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...ge.olympics.problems.ap/index.html
http://www.adn.com/24hour/topstories/story/346122.html
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...otests.tibet.violent.ap/index.html

There have also been calls to boycott China inprotest of her support of the regimes in Darfur and Myanmar.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...mar.olympics.boycott.ap/index.html

Also pollution is rearing it's head as an issue. The britsh have said that they will not be issuing masks for it's athletes at the games, backing the claim by both the IOC and Chinese that their air is clean enough for competiont.

The world record holder for the marathon has already stated that he will be unable to attend the games due to the combination of pollution and the Asthma he is aflicted with. Several countries are already on planning on keeping their athletes out of China for training and only bringing them in-country when their events happen.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...na.promise.clean.air.ap/index.html
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...itish.athletes.masks.ap/index.html
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...na.promise.clean.air.ap/index.html

With all of these destractions, can the olympics bet anything resembling a success, despite Jacques Rogge, the Chines and IOC's desires?

Hell we haven't even gotten into athlete's doping!

I believe the main question is, why did the IOC picked China? Was it in the Samaranch years?

Quoting L-188 (Thread starter): International Olympic Committee President Jacques Rogge recently made statements asking countries to reject the notition of boycotting the games in China, saying it will only hurt the athletes.

It will hurt the image of the Olympics far more than the athletes as it will simply become just another venue for airing political differences. Carter made a huge mistake in 1980 and we saw the results in 1984. They need to just let the Olympics be what it is, which is a neutral venue for athletics. Too bad the games have come to represent a tool for showcasing national prestige. Maybe if the politics could be diminished a little the desire to boycott for whatever reason will also be diminished. Unfortunately, that will probably never happen.

No offence, but the world includes China, and all of Chinas actions - if you cant accept that, dont claim inclusion.

Does the IOC rules preclude picking someone within the boundries of the 'earth'?

Some people may not like my personal stance (and, if you wish, you can call me on it in the thread Im about to post), but everyone on this entire world is due their own independent and individual view on life - there is no global, default, basics of ethics. Chinas may suck to some of us, but its their view, and if the IOC were to withdraw their backing of the games in China, then they should hand in their 'I' part of their name, because they are most definitely not 'International', and more 'Collection of countries we agree with arbitrarily'.

[Edited 2008-03-15 16:17:08]

Quoting Moo (Reply 3): Some people may not like my personal stance (and, if you wish, you can call me on it in the thread Im about to post), but everyone on this entire world is due their own independent and individual view on life - there is no global, default, basics of ethics

If you really are from the Falklands or have ties to the islands, this is a shocking viewpoint. I would have thought of all people's they would have recent memories of what is like to be oppressed by an unwanted invader.

The Chinese (government), is imposing itself on the Tibetan people, which clearly have historically been separate from China and want to regain self-determination of their destiny.

You can't seriously suggest that there should be an 'OLYMPIC GAMES' in China, an event which is in it's idealic sense about brotherhood, understanding, and peaceful coexistence between peoples, nations, races and cultures, when at the very same moment the host country is opressing under curfew and military law (meaning, you go out, you are dead), a group of people which are by any means measurable is not even it's own, but a distinct culture.

The IOC should have never chosen China. I think that if there is a curfew or oppression in any part of China nearing the start of the games, ALL countries (at least those that are democratic in Europe, Oceania, the Americas, and large part of Asia), would be the ultimate hypocrites and cowards if they attend. It would be a mockery of human rights in an event that supposedly is promoting them the likes the world has never seen.

I can see both side of the coin on this one - on one side, the games are supposed to be apolitical, and everyone wants to pretend that bringing in much of the world media can only be good for freedom of the press in China. However, on the other side, having high profile guests attending the games makes for pretty propaganda pictures. We're basically back to Moscow 1980.

I'd like to see Denmark take the position we took back in 1980. Keep the officials at home, but send the athletes and let them compete under the Olympic Flag and use the Olympic hymn for victory ceremonies.

Quoting AR385 (Reply 1): I believe the main question is, why did the IOC picked China? Was it in the Samaranch years?

Beijing was chosen on the same congress where Samaranch was replace. So presumably you could say it was.

Quoting L-188 (Thread starter): International Olympic Committee President Jacques Rogge recently made statements asking countries to reject the notition of boycotting the games in China, saying it will only hurt the athletes. He has also stated that the IOC cannot fix the problems of the world and has asked activist groups not to pressure sponsers from giving money to the games.

The "modern" Olympic movement is nothing more than commercial money making endeavor. Once they let professional athletes in, I stopped watching, and caring.

I would love to see individual athletes, especially expected stars from the USA, Europe and other 'democratic' countries to decide not to attend the Olympics in China in protest over the wide range of despicable policies of the country, especially those who are religious. Yes, they might sacrifice income from advertising and endorsements if they went and won, but if they didn't attend and make it clear to the free world press the reasons in that decision, it would deprive the PRC of the meaning of the Olympics has become to them. I don't plan to watch any of the events on the NBC network in part due to the games in China, but also due to horrible USA centered coverage of these games and the probably political whitewash they will give the games.
To me 2008 may mean the end of the Summer Olympics as we have known them. They have become too expensive, especially for the modern security features needed, for any country to ever recover the investment from. The use of performance enhancing drugs has ruined fair competition. The nationalism rampant by the host country as well as some competitors (unfortunately often from the USA competitors) ruins the spirit. There will be no true freedom of speech, religion, political expression in the PRC. In the end, it will be a terrible situation that will hurt China rather than help them.

Quoting CPH-R (Reply 5): Beijing was chosen on the same congress where Samaranch was replace. So presumably you could say it was.

Great. Then we know how China was picked to be the Olympics home for 2008. Samaranch probably added a fat bonus to his retirement account.

Quoting LTBEWR (Reply 7): I would love to see individual athletes, especially expected stars from the USA, Europe and other 'democratic' countries to decide not to attend the Olympics in China in protest over the wide range of despicable policies of the country, especially those who are religious

the whole point of the olympics is to be non-political. By asking athletes to do this, you are asking them to go against everything the olympics stands for.

China was chosen to host the olympics, and therefore china shall be the host - regardless of what you may feel about China politically.

The China olympics do not need saving - instead the athletes and all those against it need to wake up and realise what the olympics are all about.

Quoting Nighthawk (Reply 9): the whole point of the olympics is to be non-political.

You need to tell that to the 'people's' government in Beijing.   
They're already using them as a major propaganda tool, while still happily censoring anything negative about them in the press. The games themselves will most probably be heavily 'censored'. But in all honesty, I am still quite glad they are held in China.

Beijing owns and censors all the media sources inside China, but I am curious to see what will happen when the country is invaded by a swarm of reporters from all over the world, many of which will not only focus their attention on the athletes' performance but will take advantage of the spotlights to try and stick their noses into all the stuff you're not 'supposed' to see in the country.

However, I sincerely hope it all goes well and that it'll be a good opportunity for China and the rest of the world to get a little closer to each other, as I believe it was one of the goals of the IOC when the decision was made.

as a proud Greek/Australian I'm horrified that the games are being hosted by Beijing, not sure what the IOC was thinking years ago when it handed the Chinese the games.

Quoting L-188 (Thread starter): The world record holder for the marathon has already stated that he will be unable to attend the games due to the combination of pollution and the Asthma he is aflicted with.

not his decision to make, therefore, Ethiopian Athletics has said that Hailie will race in the marathon.

Quoting Moo (Reply 3): No offence, but the world includes China, and all of Chinas actions - if you cant accept that, dont claim inclusion. Does the IOC rules preclude picking someone within the boundries of the 'earth'?

IOC is bound by the bang for their buck...the Olympic games lost their prestige many years ago.

China should not have been granted the Olympic Games, period. The symbolic nature of the Olympics with their supposedly high ideals of fair play and honesty should have precluded them being awarded to such an amoral country as China. It's not like they even pretend to be a democracy, or anything other than a totalitarian dictatorship. Fine, if they're happy with that, good for them, but it's not something the rest of us should be encouraging. I won't be watching, and I hope it turns out to be a complete farce.

Someone in a PM suggested that I was too pessimistic in my earlier post, that the 2008 Olympics in China may be the end of them as we have known them for the reasons I noted there. I do believe that the politics of the PRC will discourage a significant number of athletes personally choosing not to attend. I was not saying they should disappear, but rather a scaling down of the Summer Olympics in scope of events and participants.

While the ideal has been to allow all countries and athletes to participate, perhaps we need to only allow the top 12 to 20 individuals and counties in international rankings in their sports to participate. We need to end the practice of playing the national anthems and flying of flags of countries of the winners when they win the medals, thus downplaying the nationalism and politics of the participants and home country. A scaled down Olympics would also discourage the use of illegal and dangerous performance enhancing drugs and treatments. Some events, like indoor cycling that have very specific facility needs little usable after the Olympics should be dropped as well as those that have very narrow international interest. Events should have significant participation on at least 3 continentants. We should drop those events that are more military in their nature, like those involving guns. A scaled down Olympics would also mean much lower costs to the host countries/cities, less enviromental damage, smaller cities and countries could participate so perhaps someday them being held in an African or South American country. A more modest scale of Olympics would also bring them back to something more to the ideal of their modern revival and bring about a more peaceful world.

Olympics became political as early as 1936 when the Nazis used it for their propaganda. So I've always wondered where those people live(d) who claim the Olympic games are not political. Sports and especially Olympics are a great opportunity for oppressive regimes to gain recognition.
Hence I tend to support those who lobby for a boycott of the games this year.

Quoting L-188 (Thread starter): Hell we haven't even gotten into athlete's doping!

Indeed. I bet we are going to see some Chinese "wonders" this year...

pelican

Quoting Pelican (Reply 15): Indeed. I bet we are going to see some Chinese "wonders" this year...

Yeah, like those "female" swimmers who looked like Arnold Schwarzenegger - ah, but it's all natural Chinese herbs and berries no doubt. Hyuhhh !!

Quoting QANTAS077 (Reply 11): not his decision to make, therefore, Ethiopian Athletics has said that Hailie will race in the marathon.

Wanna bet?

All it would take is one well timed "24 hour flu" and he is out.

Quoting Derico (Reply 4): The IOC should have never chosen China.

This could bring unprecedented attention to Tibet. Everyone's seen Free Tibet bumper stickers but now it's front page, and it could be for a while if protests don't stop, or stopped by unacceptable means which I am not entirely sure China wants to go that way--politically speaking it could be even worse. I think China is in a big pickle with Tibet and the Olympics this year.

Bringing the Olympics to their country could and IMO will probably give freedom a boost within their borders. Of course, I understand both view points and I think there are valid arguments for both sides. In the end all we can do is hope for the good side outweigh the bad side. . .

[Edited 2008-03-16 11:39:09]

These Olympics were lost when they were given to China.

Wouldn't surprise me if China just paid the highest sum of all the candidates and that's what the IOC gets. The best solution would be to just cancel the 2008 Olympics, but this again would be unfair for all the sportsmen and -women who worked hard towards these Olympics.

The IOC will have to act accordingly, or they will lose the last bit of credibility they have left. I can't understand how a global organisation liek the IOC can act so naivly and think that a country like China would turn around completely in a matter of a few years? They were awarded with the 2008 Olympics on the condition to improve human rights in China, but what happens is exactly the opposite. This again brings me back to the money-theory, and there's indeed a lot of truth in that old saying: "Money rules the world"

I wonder how much China is willing to pay the IOC for them to name the Beijing Olympics "the best Games ever".  

Quoting QANTAS077 (Reply 11): not his decision to make, therefore, Ethiopian Athletics has said that Hailie will race in the marathon.

Are you serious? I'm quite sure he can decide on his own to not participate; after all, he doesn't race for Chiina or Cuba. If they choose to cut him from the team for later events, they probably can do this but athletes have changed countries before and I'm sure there would be a long line of countries willing to take him on.

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 18): Everyone's seen Free Tibet bumper stickers but now it's front page, and it could be for a while if protests don't stop, or stopped by unacceptable means which I am not entirely sure China wants to go that way--politically speaking it could be even worse.

These protests have been around awhile. I remember that I went to a "Free Tibet" concert in San Francisco back in 1994 with the Beastie Boys and a bunch of other bands. They had alot of propaganda and monks from Tibet to state their purpose. Nothing has changed except for the fact that China is forced to play the image game as they are now in the market for global cash and power.

I am actually suprised as to how subdued China has been so far in its reaction.

Quoting AviationMaster (Reply 20): I wonder how much China is willing to pay the IOC for them to name the Beijing Olympics "the best Games ever". Wink

They will surely shell-out enormous bucks to make this thing as amazing as it gets. Even if that means taxing another billion out of their rice farmers and $1.25-an-hour workers.

Then again, as seen with their brand new airport, that's nothing new and they know no bounds when it comes to building huge and expensive and shiny structures when there's political interest in.

I'm betting on quite a spectacle, but with a not-less spectacular tab to boot.

[Edited 2008-03-16 12:28:29]

It was a sick joke to award the Olympics to China in the first place. Even if there was no issue with Tibet, the environmental aspects of the Olympics, unability of the Chinese to bring the pollution - at least temporarily - under control, child labor etc. are sufficent reasons to call it off.

Quoting L-188 (Thread starter): President Jacques Rogge recently made statements asking countries to reject the notition of boycotting the games in China, saying it will only hurt the athletes.

God, that must suck having your doping schedule all set for the 2008 and then realize it was all in vain.   

Quoting L-188 (Thread starter): He has also stated that the IOC cannot fix the problems of the world and has asked activist groups not to pressure sponsers from giving money to the games.

The corrupt IOC certainly cannot an will not fix the problems of the world, however the IOC and national OCs should not gag those atletes who wish to voice their opposition. I believe the Belgian and British OC have stated that they will not tolerate any political statements and will Anyone can confirm that?

Quoting AR385 (Reply 8): Then we know how China was picked to be the Olympics home for 2008. Samaranch probably added a fat bonus to his retirement account.

I doubt that Samaranch's guilty any more than all those delegates from mostly African and other countries who were "dines and wined" into voting for China 2008.

Quoting SandroZRH (Reply 19): They were awarded with the 2008 Olympics on the condition to improve human rights in China, but what happens is exactly the opposite.

They awarded the 2014 Winter Olympics to Russia which is getting more and more totalitarian by the day.

On a personal level, I don't give a rat's ass about sports, and I won't watch a second of the Olympics, wherever they may be...

I see a very wide range of arguments cited to boycott the Beijing Olympics. Child labor, pollution, human rights, Tibet... All those issues are true, but they still strike me as extremely arbitrary. Who is to say what is an appropriate host country? If one says Tibet is reason enough then fine, but following that logic (we do want to be logical now, don't we?), the same ban should apply outright to Serbia (Kosovo), Israel (Palestine), Turkey (Kurdistan), Spain (Basque Country) and every place where there is a separatist movement. That makes a shitload of countries.

And if my personal criterion of acceptability was, say, the lack of death penalty, the US or Japan would never host the Olympics. What makes that argument less valid than independence movements?

What about social inequalities? Sorry, Brazil, sorry, India. What about the right to abortion? Sorry, Chile, sorry, Ireland. What about countries at war? Sorry, US, sorry, UK, sorry, Poland....

If we're going to play moralists here, let's be consistent and have a good hard look at the countries we live in. I personally am not impressed by our own moral standards. But that certainly doesn't mean I think arbitrary "morality" should have anything to do with deciding where we want to run around in circles and play with balls during our quadrennial jockfest.

In the case of China, I think it was a good idea to award Beijing the Olympics. Massive investments and a big influx of foreigners to this formerly isolated country will help the Chinese far more than any embargo or cold war dreamt of by Western right-wingers.

Here are the choices we have as I see it:

1. Allow China to go ahead, send in millions of dollars' worth of investments and hundreds of thousands of foreign nationals and reporters;

2. Tell China to eff off and let it stew in its sense of insulted national pride; piss off 1.2 billion people; see unused infrastructures rot away; face economic retaliation; watch the country revert to isolationism.

Which option do you think would be more beneficial to the average Chinese we claim to be so worried about?




edit: typo

[Edited 2008-03-16 13:26:14]

Quoting Toast (Reply 25): In the case of China, I think it was a good idea to award Beijing the Olympics.

Why am I not surprised???

Quoting Toast (Reply 25): Massive investments and a big influx of foreigners to this formerly isolated country will help the Chinese far more than any embargo or cold war dreamt of by Western right-wingers.

  Nonsense. 70 years ago you'd claim 1936 Berlin will save Germany from nazism. As far as I remember 1980 Moscow Olympics did exactly zero for the Evil Empire to be any less evil (had he not been already neck-deep stuck in Afghani quagmire Brezhnev almost invaded Poland less than 6 months later).
The only thing it will do is provide additional international legitimacy for whatever wrongs China government perpetrates.

Quoting Toast (Reply 25): If one says Tibet is reason enough then fine, but following that logic (we do want to be logical now, don't we?)

Putting Spain's treatment of the Basque Country on par with Chinese of Tibet you are not logical, you are ABSURD.

Quoting L410Turbolet (Reply 26): 70 years ago you'd claim 1936 Berlin will save Germany from nazism.

I'm not saying the Olympics will save China from anything. But backing off after having granted them the Olympics would be disastrous and will only play nicely into the Communists' hands.

Quoting L410Turbolet (Reply 26): As far as I remember 1980 Moscow Olympics did exactly zero for the Evil Empire to be any less evil

The USSR was economically isolated from the West. There were almost no foreign investors; the situation with China today is incomparable. Trillions of dollars are at stake. And huge amounts of people will fly there to see the event and, obviously, to see China. The money and the amount of people involved make the 1936 and 1980 Olympics look like a provincial farm fair by comparison. The key do dictatorship has always been isolation; today, the Olympics can breach a far larger hole in the wall than 30 years ago.

Quoting L410Turbolet (Reply 26): The only thing it will do is provide additional international legitimacy for whatever wrongs China government perpetrates.

What does hosting a game have to do with international legitimacy?

Quoting L410Turbolet (Reply 26): Putting Spain's treatment of the Basque Country on par with Chinese of Tibet you are not logical, you are ABSURD.

No, it isn't. Thousands of people died in the Spanish conflict. And Tibet never was a viable state. Before the Chinese took over, it was a medieval theocracy, something the Dalai Lama prefers not to be reminded of. It's absurd to say the Chinese are oppressing a once free country. It was just as bad under Tibetan rule, with slavery and illiteracy to boot. But that's another thread.

Quoting L410Turbolet (Reply 26): Nonsense. 70 years ago you'd claim 1936 Berlin will save Germany from nazism.

Perhaps he would have claimed that boycotting the Olympic Games wouldn't have saved Germany from nazism. And he would have been certainly right.

Quoting Toast (Reply 25): 2. Tell China to eff off and let it stew in its sense of insulted national pride; piss off 1.2 billion people; see unused infrastructures rot away; face economic retaliation; watch the country revert to isolationism.

You can add "expose Tibetans and other minorities to an even more ruthless cultural genocide, kill off any chance of political or civil rights reform" to the list.

Quoting Toast (Reply 27): And huge amounts of people will fly there to see the event and, obviously, to see China.

Certainly not me. BTW, do you know what "Potemkin's village" means? That's exactly what China will be during Olympics.

Quoting Toast (Reply 27): But backing off after having granted them the Olympics would be disastrous and will only play nicely into the Communists' hands.

Awarding them the Games, resp. going ahead will play into their hands even more.

Quoting Toast (Reply 25): watch the country revert to isolationism

If isolationism would mean seeing less of toxic Chinese junk flooding the world I'd be all for it.

Quoting L410Turbolet (Reply 29): do you know what "Potemkin's village" means?

I do. But there are far less restrictions on travel in modern China than in the USSR, as anyone who's been there will tell you. You can't lock up thousands of people in their hotel rooms and herd them where you want. Not possible today.

And yes, I will go visit China as soon as I achieve the right time slot/money ratio. After the Olympics.

Quoting L410Turbolet (Reply 29): Awarding them the Games, resp. going ahead will play into their hands even more.

How?

Quoting L410Turbolet (Reply 29): If isolationism would mean seeing less of toxic Chinese junk flooding the world I'd be all for it.

Don't buy it then. As for me, I'm not prepared to wall off 15% of the world's population because they make cheap socks, or because I dislike their rulers.

Quoting Toast (Reply 25): watch the country revert to isolationism.

A nation which gained all its wealth from export can't revert to isolationism without risking its wealth.

Quoting Toast (Reply 25): Tell China to eff off and let it stew in its sense of insulted national pride; piss off 1.2 billion people; see unused infrastructures rot away; face economic retaliation

Signed, Neville Chamberlain...


pelican

Quoting BHMBAGLOCK (Reply 21): Are you serious? I'm quite sure he can decide on his own to not participate

do you think I would've said it for no good reason?

http://sport.guardian.co.uk/breakingnews/feedstory/0,,-7385023,00.html

see for yourself!

Quoting L-188 (Reply 17): Wanna bet?

yep...EAF decide if he is fit to run.

[Edited 2008-03-16 15:13:05]

Quoting Toast (Reply 30): As for me, I'm not prepared to wall off 15% of the world's population because they make cheap socks, or because I dislike their rulers.

Even if this feeling of laughable and most of all fake "solidarity" and cheapness means putting countless jobs in your own country in danger?
Even if this means basically buying stolen goods (thanks to complete disregard of the Chinese for copyright, patent ownership and intelectual property)?.
Shortsighted and naive.

Quoting Toast (Reply 30): How?

How will hosting an olympics by an oppressive, tyrannical government will play into its hands? They will only use it for their propaganda, solidify the regime

Quoting Toast (Reply 27): today, the Olympics can breach a far larger hole in the wall than 30 years ago.

So far I have heard only Mr. Rogge to tow this line. The difference is: he's paid by the corrupt IOC to say so. You seem to believe it.

Quoting Toast (Reply 27): Trillions of dollars are at stake.

Whose dollars? Dollars of irresponsible corporations who'd sell their mother if they were paid enough? If its money of the likes of Yahoo, who are willing accomplices to the Chinese government in censorship and putting people in jail I couldn't care less.

Quoting Pelican (Reply 31): Quoting Toast (Reply 25): Tell China to eff off and let it stew in its sense of insulted national pride; piss off 1.2 billion people; see unused infrastructures rot away; face economic retaliation Signed, Neville Chamberlain...

Don't forget me!

Signed, Édouard Daladier

Quoting L410Turbolet (Reply 33): Even if this feeling of laughable and most of all fake "solidarity" and cheapness means putting countless jobs in your own country in danger?

That's capitalism, and I'm all for it. If you can produce more and cheaper than I can, good for you. The Chinese are better businessmen than you? Pull up your socks and work harder.

Quoting L410Turbolet (Reply 33): Even if this means basically buying stolen goods (thanks to complete disregard of the Chinese for copyright, patent ownership and intelectual property)?.

I dunno about you, but I've never bought a single pirated item in my life. If the Chinese produce so much counterfeit crap, it's because there's a market for it. Where's that market? Right here in our good ole self-righteous Europe and America.

Quoting L410Turbolet (Reply 33): How will hosting an olympics by an oppressive, tyrannical government will play into its hands? They will only use it for their propaganda, solidify the regime

How precisely do you think that works?

Quoting L410Turbolet (Reply 33): he's paid by the corrupt IOC to say so. You seem to believe it.

I don't even know who Mr Rogge is. It's a commonsensical conclusion IMO.

Quoting L410Turbolet (Reply 33): Dollars of irresponsible corporations who'd sell their mother if they were paid enough?

So what are you saying, anyone who invests in China is a sell-out to Communists?

Quoting L410Turbolet (Reply 33): the likes of Yahoo, who are willing accomplices to the Chinese government in censorship

I agree about Yahoo (or was it Google?) But apart from those assholes, do you really think investing in China is doing a disservice to the population?

Well the lastest public relations snafu has hit.

China and Nepal announced that they are closing down summits on Mt. Everest for 10 days in May so that the torch run can summit in peace.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080317/ap_on_re_as/everest_nepal_china

Quoting Toast (Reply 25): Spain (Basque Country) and every place where there is a separatist movement.

As someone else said this is absurd.

Quoting Toast (Reply 27): No, it isn't. Thousands of people died in the Spanish conflict. And Tibet never was a viable state. Before the Chinese took over, it was a medieval theocracy, something the Dalai Lama prefers not to be reminded of. It's absurd to say the Chinese are oppressing a once free country. It was just as bad under Tibetan rule, with slavery and illiteracy to boot. But that's another thread.

I agree with you on the Tibet part. It was a feudal state where the "peace-loving" monks repressed and exploited the peasant population. They were also starved and treated like farm animals. Richard Gere, the Dalai-Lama, and others, conveniently "forget" these things. You are right.

However, you are wrong on the Spanish conflict. The Civil War had nothing to do with the Separatist Movement.

Quoting AR385 (Reply 36): you are wrong on the Spanish conflict. The Civil War had nothing to do with the Separatist Movement.

I wasn't talking about the Spanish Civil War; my remark concerned exclusively the conflict with ETA since 1961. If we say one separatist movement is legitimate (Tibet) but another is not (Spain, or wherever) and base our decision on awarding the Olympics on that, we're making a judgment that has nothing to do with sports.

Nobody says China shouldn't host international folk music contests or medical conferences. Why? Because they have nothing to do with politics. What makes sports more important than folk music or medicine? Just because our Western civilization is sadly addicted to mindless activities like running in circles or jumping in a sandbox, doesn't mean sports should dictate our foreign relations.

typo...
another bloody typo...
[Edited 2008-03-17 00:35:53]

[Edited 2008-03-17 00:36:33]

Quoting Toast (Reply 37): I wasn't talking about the Spanish Civil War; my remark concerned exclusively the conflict with ETA since 1961. If we say one separatist movement is legitimate (Tibet) but another is not (Spain, or wherever) and base our decision on awarding the Olympics on that, we're making a judgment that has nothing to do with sports.

Hmm, I didn't know that the Basques are oppressed by Spaniards nowadays. I haven't heard of any riots merciless quelled with lots of dead in the Basque region lately.
The recent demands to boycott the 2008 Olympics are not based on the Tibet occupation alone, but on the recent violence against Tibetan.

Quoting Toast (Reply 37): Just because our Western civilization is sadly addicted to mindless activities like running in circles or jumping in a sandbox, doesn't mean sports should dictate our foreign relations.

That's ridiculous. It's the other way round. We would use the Olympics - to be more precise a boycott - as a means of foreign politics. Whether that's a good choice is a subject for debate (hence that thread...).

pelican

Quoting Pelican (Reply 38): I didn't know that the Basques are oppressed by Spaniards nowadays

Like in Tibet, it's all a matter of who you listen to. Talk to a Basque independentist and you'll get a long list of wrongs committed by Spain; talk to the Dalai Lama, and he'll tell you how badly the Chinese treat Tibet. Everyone has an axe to grind. And again, people who organize sporting events have no business deciding where the truth lies in matters like this. What matters in sporting events is infrastructure, communications, accommodation, facilities. If you want to help Tibet, get into politics.

Remember that every time you fill your car with gas, you're helping barbaric regimes oppress people in the Middle East. If you want to boycott the Olympics, be a man and boycott oil, too. Choosing to shun only China - because it doesn't require any personal effort - doesn't make you a brave defender of human rights.

I don't even want to think about politics when enjoying the Olympic Games. Personally, I can't wait to watch them. I've waited 4 years, I'm not going to boycott them and pretend that I'm doing the world a great thing.

Quoting Toast (Reply 25): And if my personal criterion of acceptability was, say, the lack of death penalty, the US or Japan would never host the Olympics.

Hmmm. Another good reason for keeping the death penalty - especially if means we won't ever be awarded another Olympic travesty.  

Quoting Toast (Reply 25): If we're going to play moralists here, let's be consistent and have a good hard look at the countries we live in. I personally am not impressed by our own moral standards. But that certainly doesn't mean I think arbitrary "morality" should have anything to do with deciding where we want to run around in circles and play with balls during our quadrennial jockfest.

Agree. The problem with applying morality to the Olympics is that such an act would would only be relevant if the Olympic movement was actually something to admire and strive for.

Quoting Toast (Reply 34): That's capitalism, and I'm all for it. If you can produce more and cheaper than I can, good for you. The Chinese are better businessmen than you? Pull up your socks and work harder.

More like hire more children to work for slave wages and produce unsafe goods. Don't act like they work harder unless you are going to put everyone on equal footing.

latest report isn't flattering for the Chinese...note the shoot on sight order.

Quote: Tibet's Government-in-exile says the United Nations has proved itself to be a "white elephant" by failing to act more decisively over China's repression of protesters. The criticism came amid reports that Chinese forces had been ordered to shoot Tibetan protesters on sight after a midnight deadline to surrender passed. Riot police and paramilitary forces are keeping a tight grip on Tibetan communities across western China after the deadline for protesters in the Tibetan capital Lhasa to give themselves up to authorities expired. Government-in-exile Prime Minister Sampdong Rimpoche accused the Chinese Government of "brutal behaviour". He said there was no international agency to prevent the shoot-to-kill orders being carried out and described the United Nations as an undemocratic body. "The international community are also a silent onlooker. There has been no concrete action except consoling words," he said. "The UN system in my view is the most undemocratic institution in this world. It's just a white elephant." There are no reports at this stage of demonstrators handing themselves in. United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon called for restraint from China after the deadline passed. "At this time I urge restraint on the part of the authorities and call on all concerned to avoid further confrontation and violence," he said after meeting China's ambassador to the UN. China is a permanent member of the UN Security Council with the power to veto any attempts to act on Tibet. Protests continue Protests continued overnight in the Chinese provinces of Gansu, Qinghai and Sichuan, as well as in Beijing and in the Nepalese capital Kathmandu. In Gansu, Tibetan students have staged sit-ins, while in Sichuan there have been more bloody clashes reported between demonstrators and riot police. Fresh protests flared near two Sichuan Tibetan schools, with hundreds of students facing police and troops and about 40 students from a high school were beaten and arrested. Monasteries in Qinghai are all under close surveillance, but many Tibetans remain determined to seize this opportunity to be heard. Ethnic Tibetan students have staged a candle-lit vigil in Beijing to pray for the dead. Police kept reporters well away from the peaceful protest by dozens of students inside the Central University for Nationalities. It was a small, rare show of defiance in the host city of this year's Olympic Games, where Communist Party authorities are eager to prevent public shows of dissent. The vigil was broken up by authorities just hours before Lhasa's deadline. The fact that Tibetans are prepared to demonstrate, despite the huge security presence is perhaps a measure of the depth of their frustration. They know the international community is watching them, but it is becoming more difficult to get their message out. Foreign journalists are now facing heavy restrictions. Many have been ordered to leave China's restive west and some have been detained for visiting monasteries where protests have taken place. Lhasa locked down Meanwhile, heavy security remained in place on the streets of Lhasa after the deadline passed. The city has been quiet for the past 24 hours and there has been no repeat of the anti-Chinese riots of recent days. The Tibetan government in exile in India says protests by Tibetans have continued elsewhere in China, some involving thousands of people. It says house-to-house searches have been going on and a number of former political prisoners are reported to have been detained again. Meanwhile the Chinese Government has maintained its attack on the Dalai Lama, claiming to have proof that he organised the riots in Tibet. "Regarding this entire incident ...we have enough evidence to prove that these actions were completely organised by the Dalai Lama," Chinese Government spokesman Liu Jianchao said. He did not produce any of evidence but said the Chinese Government would divulge it at the appropriate time.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/03/18/2192143.htm