PDA

View Full Version : Time to boycott???



geochuck
March 17th, 2008, 06:20 PM
Is it time to boycott the Olympics. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcfQ8GA063c&feature=related

I think it is.

Or let China continue its attack on Tibet without boycotting.

Paul Smith
March 17th, 2008, 07:43 PM
Could not disagree with you more.

I felt the same way with Carter in 80' and nothing has changed.

If you want change in China don't punish the athletes and fans of the world who love sport...punish the politicians in that country who are making these decisions on Tibet. Rather than boycott the games boycott the country economically by getting as many people worldwide to not buy anything made in China for a month....

jim clemmons
March 17th, 2008, 08:12 PM
Rather than boycott the games boycott the country economically by getting as many people worldwide to not buy anything made in China for a month....

A month won't do it. There's too many of 'em.

Allen Stark
March 17th, 2008, 08:19 PM
The 1980 boycott was a disaster for our swimmers and had no discernible effect on the Soviets.The more contact the Chinese have with the world the less they will be able to "control" their people.

Ripple
March 17th, 2008, 08:50 PM
...Rather than boycott the games boycott the country economically by getting as many people worldwide to not buy anything made in China for a month....
I'm inclined to agree. The boycott of the Moscow Games had not effect at all.
The problem is boycotting goods made in China. It's getting nearly impossible to find anything that isn't made there.

smontanaro
March 17th, 2008, 09:08 PM
It was a disaster for all our athletes. I played volleyball for several years in the 1980's with a guy who was on the men's volleyball team in 1980. He never got to take what turned out to be his one shot. While I'm sympathetic to the notion that a boycott might help get China to mend its ways a bit (*) I don't think destroying the lifetime dreams of a bunch of athletes (or cheapening the victories of those whose countries don't boycott because they aren't always competing against the best) is the right way to go about it. Talk about "collateral damage".

Let's make this concrete and bring it back to swimming. Open water swimming will be a demo sport in Beijing. Erica Rose (http://www.ericaroseswimming.com/), a former distance swimmer at Northwestern, has been training seriously for her chance for a couple years. She coaches our masters team on Fridays at noon. I'm told she's currently putting in around 85,000 yards a week. Assuming she actually takes a day off every week, we're talking more than 14,000 yards daily. Our head coach Pam said she sometimes swims for extended periods (more than an hour) secured to a diving board with a stretch cord. And this is "just a demo sport". Ask Erica (http://www.ericaroseswimming.com/contact/) if she'd like the US (or Canada) to boycott Beijing.

Skip Montanaro

* I think the Chinese are more susceptible to bad PR today than the Soviet Union was in 1980, primarily because their economy is much more dependent on the global economy than the Soviet Union's was.

Redbird Alum
March 17th, 2008, 09:14 PM
The Olympics transcend politics. A boycott of the Olympics is foolish, hence we can expect the politicians to suggest it.

I say, let the Games go on!

Paul Smith
March 17th, 2008, 10:19 PM
A month won't do it. There's too many of 'em.

I can't say for certain....but my guess is 1 month without products made in China worldwide would be trillions of dollars...and I'd guess that would get their attention.

The trick would be to do it without killing our own industries....which is probably impossible.

geochuck
March 17th, 2008, 10:59 PM
USA industry would suffer for sure. Fischer Price and a few other toy companies would surely suffer. It would close down their manufacturing plants what a shame.

Or did I read that all their manufacturing plants are not in the USA.

knelson
March 17th, 2008, 11:41 PM
Open water swimming will be a demo sport in Beijing.

I don't think it's a demo sport. I believe it's a full medal event. The 10 km OW will be contested for both men and women.

SwimsWithAFist
March 17th, 2008, 11:51 PM
If you want change in China don't punish the athletes and fans of the world who love sport...punish the politicians in that country who are making these decisions on Tibet. Rather than boycott the games boycott the country economically by getting as many people worldwide to not buy anything made in China for a month....

WHAT??????

You are not seriously suggesting that I go without Happy Meal toys for a full month, are you?

tjburk
March 18th, 2008, 12:01 AM
No way, notta, not a chance...no freaking way, nope, absotively posilutely no!

SwimStud
March 18th, 2008, 08:18 AM
Send in Chuck Norris, he'll sort this all out...Double-time!

Stillhere
March 18th, 2008, 08:35 AM
I swam with two guys over the years that would have gone to the Olympic Games we boycotted and from they tell me it was a bad deal. They worked their entire lives to reach that goal only to have it stripped away over politics. Do not punish the hard working athletes for political reasons.

In my life time (58) China has always been run by thugs, probably always will be run by thugs and it should not be a surprise to anyone that they have a horrible track record of human rights abuse. Frankly, the USA sold out to them for cheap TV sets and all the other products we buy from them. Heck, a huge USA based airline headquartered in Chicago has all their B-777 heavy maintenance performed in China and our elected leaders allowed this to take place. We are rapidly becoming consumers as opposed to producers because we sold out for cheap labor in China.

Don’t sell out our athletes!

SwimStud
March 18th, 2008, 08:51 AM
I said it in a previous post

The Moscow boycott made the boycottting nations look petulant and bratty. Nothing was achieved. If the athletes decdied to individually boycott then that is their right and sends a stronger message IMHO.

I don't see anyting "democratic and free" about politically preventing someone doing something (legal) that they trained for their whole life up to that point. Seems like the opposite...

art_z
March 18th, 2008, 09:25 AM
Boycotting the games will do nothing. Boycotting Chinese made products will get the message across.

ViveBene
March 18th, 2008, 09:28 AM
China appears to be getting some shocks (and responding with usual indignation, claims to sovereign nation status, etc.) it wasn't expecting; the spotlight on China may well aid transparency altho' probably not change millennial way of doing things in the near term. I regret draconian measures but think a national boycott of Olympics does not answer.

Didn't China's courts recently review some capital punishment cases and commute the sentences? U.S. has its own incarceration rate to think about. The world in shades of gray....

Boycotts and sanctions have a history of hurting the wrong people.

Regards, VB

orca1946
March 19th, 2008, 07:02 PM
Did we learn nothing from 1980 ????
Let the idiots we elected do that, let the athletes do their thing, PLEASE

Tree
March 24th, 2008, 10:42 AM
I do not believe that boycotting Olympics or Chinese products would make the Chinese government change anything. At the end of the day the government has the last option- the army, to suppress the domestic insurgency(if there is any) to maintain its control. 1989 Tian An Men Square was a proof. Boycotting Olympics would only make the atheletes' hard work wasted. And boycotting Chinese products would only make those Chinese conditions worse whose lives are dependent on those manufacturers. Both those atheletes and those ordinary Chinese have done nothing wrong.

I know my opinion sound biased. But the Tibet issue is very complex. One need to look into it from not only a west culture/political way but also a Chinese culture/political way. If you look into it only on the basis of a west way(the earliest west culture's opinion on Tibet started from British at the British Empire era) then I would say it is just one side of the whole story. Chinese had been living with Tibetans for ages before the British set a foot in Tibet. Our history with Tibet and our culture also need to be considered when this issue is debated.

But I agree that there is no excuse for Chinese government to abuse the human rights of Tibetans. And it is sad to admit that most of my fellow Chinese me included can do nothing about it. This sort of thing has happened in ninteen eighty nine and is happening (I believe. only to what extent the government abuse the human right: hard force or soft ways ) at many parts of China Tibet included.

geochuck
March 24th, 2008, 10:59 AM
Tree the only reason I asked the question was that I was shocked at the abuse that happened in the streets. Tibetans beating on the Chinese and then the aftermath. Why can't people get along?

Paul Smith
March 24th, 2008, 11:47 AM
http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/Story?id=4501952&page=1

Stillhere
March 24th, 2008, 12:26 PM
George:
My friend I hate to be the bearer of bad news but man has NEVER been without war. We have been killing each other since man began. The human experience tells us in very clear and loud terms that man is flawed. Very flawed actually! One guy, one tribe, one country wants something another one has and the fight starts. One guy claims this land is HIS and the killing starts. Man will continue to kill weaker man until time as we know it ends.

Archaeologist Lawrence H. Keeley convincingly demonstrates in “War before Civilization”, many tribes and groups of man were anything but benign and peaceful and vast amounts of evidence indicates frequent deadly raids and occasional wholesale massacres over much of prehistoric North America. This archaeological evidence also indicates that these massacres were not only prior to Western contact, but were also more severe than anything reported in the ethnographic records for that region.

History has proved that those who survived and lived relatively peaceful lives were the ones who had the ability to defend their way of life. As much as I hate to say and believe it, but man is going to continue killing his fellow man until man no longer lives. I guess the goal is to make sure it is not me, my family, my friends or my country that gets killed.
The old saying, "It takes a very brave SOB to step over the corpse to see if the gun is still loaded!" holds true---

aquageek
March 24th, 2008, 12:37 PM
Try holding your breath for a month. That's about as possible as not buying a Chinese product for a month.

cwilson
March 24th, 2008, 02:38 PM
Horrible things are happening in our own backyards...My grandmother always said, "Before you start talking about someone else's backyard, clean up yours."

Tree
March 24th, 2008, 10:43 PM
Tree the only reason I asked the question was that I was shocked at the abuse that happened in the streets. Tibetans beating on the Chinese and then the aftermath. Why can't people get along?

George

Why cannot people just get along? Partly because what Stillhere said in his post. Partly because religion and culture difference. Partly because things I do not know. Personally I think it is majorly because of the religion and culture difference. Something is correct in one culture might be regarded completely wrong in another, which can lead to conflicts.

The Youtube video you provided was banned here. I did not know what had happened in that video. From the information issued so far it was possible that the central government was playing the same trick that they had done in 1989. But I also heard people who were in Tibet when the conflict started said that there was indeed some Tibetans doing some damages to the public. I will wait for more information to see what the truth is.

Peter Cruise
March 25th, 2008, 01:36 AM
By far the most eloquent political statement made at, or through, an Olympics was made in 1968 in Mexico City by two American sprinters on the medal platform. If an individual competitor is moved by the Tibetan situation to make a similar silent protest that is their choice and I would salute that decision.

geochuck
March 25th, 2008, 07:48 AM
Are you referring to this salute. http://schol.wordpress.com/2008/02/25/1968-black-power-salute/

A little video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=85Nf9ECBelU

Stillhere
March 25th, 2008, 09:14 AM
Gosh Peter, if you are referring the salute---Both of them got kicked out of the Olympic Games and I am glad they did! Very gald actually~!

tjburk
March 25th, 2008, 09:47 AM
Athletics should transcend politics......Boycott every product they make if you like.....but do not punish our athletes.....or anyone elses athletes for that matter just to make a poilitical point.

And now, I will step down from my:soapbox:and get back to work!

orca1946
March 25th, 2008, 11:43 AM
You only need to look at our own leaders to answer that. We HAVE to tell other cultures how to live!! Right or wrong?

Karen Duggan
April 1st, 2008, 03:16 PM
DO NOT BOYCOTT!

I can think of a whole lot of people who SHOULD suffer for wrongs they are doing. These Olympians are not in that group. Leave them out of it.

Let's remember that the Olympics celebrate human achievement in the area of sport. Politics, etc. are put aside, and sportsmanship, comraderie, and the human spirit are showcased for all the world to see.

Stillhere
April 1st, 2008, 03:19 PM
Amen to that Karen!

ViveBene
April 2nd, 2008, 05:50 AM
A report is due out today (April 2) from Amnesty International entitled China: The Olympics Countdown. Here is an excerpt from the BBC Web site:

"Unless the Chinese authorities take steps to redress the situation urgently, a positive human rights legacy for the Beijing Olympics looks increasingly beyond reach," [the report] said.
"It is increasingly clear that much of the current wave of repression is occurring not in spite of the Olympics but actually because of the Olympics."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7325754.stm

I would be interested in hearing responses from those inside the country, who may have a different view.

Regards, VB

craig68
April 2nd, 2008, 03:07 PM
I just get sick even thinking about a boycott. I agree with all here who have pointed out that a boycott would only hurt the athletes, while having no effect on the Chinese government. I love the idea of an economic boycott. Our landfills could certainly do without the tons and tons of cheap and virtually disposable products we are buying from there.

Posting on the boards is great, but we all have to commit to contacting our U.S. Representatives if the U.S. begins to officially entertain the idea of a boycott.

If we could suddenly move the games to some neutral site, that would be great. But we can't. So let the games go forth as scheduled.

Can't wait for 08.08.08!

Karen Duggan
April 2nd, 2008, 04:17 PM
Isn't 888 good luck in Asian cultures?

geochuck
April 2nd, 2008, 04:36 PM
I just saw this video. It says boycott 2008 Olympics for Darfur http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZt9ZAKxy84

Redbird Alum
April 2nd, 2008, 05:07 PM
Another interesting point is that China was awarded the Games some time ago, before their "cleanup" of the city, it's air , etc. These human rights issues are not new, although they tend to get more media focus as the Games approach.

I still say, the Games should go on!

mattson
April 3rd, 2008, 03:06 AM
I thought the call to boycott was for politicians and media to skip the opening ceremonies. Let the politicians make a political statement (boycott or not), let the athletes make a sporting statement (in the pool).

ViveBene
April 3rd, 2008, 08:46 AM
I thought the call to boycott was for politicians and media to skip the opening ceremonies. <snip>

That was my impression as well, in general. A few countries are sending not their top emissaries but someone lower down the ladder. Germany's Angela Merkel is not attending opening ceremonies but apparently could not right from beginning (scheduling conflict?). I don't have the sense that athletes are in danger of being prohibited from attending. That form of protest uses humans as tokens.

Article from today's BBC on jailing of Mr. Hu Jia (and another activitist) "for attempting to subvert state's political and socialist systems":

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7327718.stm

I wonder whether the arrests are for token purposes.

The Chinese people I know - immigrants and first-generation-born-in-U.S. - as well as those who have studied East Asian societies suggest that the gap between West and East is unimaginably wide. Example: "stability and harmony" are more than ideals, they are enforceable prescriptions. Ancient Chinese saying: "The family is like the hand, and the father is the thumb." This relation also seems to hold at level of society: The population is the hand, and the Emperor/state is the thumb. Maybe things are changing.

China is a very old society, and I would expect some cultural values or traditions to be as old.

Regards, VB

fanstone
April 3rd, 2008, 09:00 AM
No one has brought this up, but according to your politics and the side you are on, and your personal beliefs...usually boycotting is a result of "them" not being like "us". I would dare say if "we" (although living in Brazil I am a U.S. citizen) were having an Olympic these last years, that "they" (any other countries with a different point of view) would also call for a boycott due to the Afghanistan and /or Iraq troubles. The boycott of 1980 was a HUGE mistake, followed by the 1984 other HUGE mistake. I also think that we are biased in the Tibet question, biased against China, maybe from propaganda or whatever...by the way, most of the world is biased in favor of Palestine, (against Israel maybe) and that doesn't take any objective stuff in consideration, but just subjective thinking. Will we boycott London because of the Scottish problem (not even mentioning Wales, Ireland and others). Because the deal over there, the "problem" is as recent as 1700 whereabouts, but Tibet has been part of China for way longer than Scotland has been part of the U.K. (or Texas part of the U.S....)

ViveBene
April 3rd, 2008, 09:14 AM
Link to Amnesty International Report, People's Republic of China: Countdown to the Olympics:

http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/ASA17/050/2008/en/83b26dc5-0008-11dd-b092-bdb020617d3d/asa170502008eng.html

(It is also available in pdf format.)

I agree on the "them" v. "us" issue. In looking for a corollary in U.S., the very high incarceration rate stands out. How astonished U.S. would be if nations boycotted an Olympics on U.S. soil because our legal system, a complex amalgam of various things, including a healthy dose of puritanism and punishment ethos, resulted in a high incarceration rate that other nations found wrong, morally repugnant, unacceptable, etc.

In doing a trifle more reading, I note that in 2001, VP of Beijing's Olympics Committee stated that hosting the Olympics would help China advance in arena of human rights. Apparently the IOC took this statement as a promissory note.

Regards, VB

fireguard
April 7th, 2008, 10:19 AM
Could you guys have a look at this discussion on PBS forum about Tibet issue? I think it gives some useful information about Tibet.

http://discussions.pbs.org/viewtopic.pbs?t=68073&sid=ce0b20590dd445725153c83b5ef21c7f

Leonard Jansen
April 7th, 2008, 10:44 AM
Another view based on my own experience: I was on the US Olympic Committee from 1982-1991. The 1980 boycott had a horrendous effect on the USOC's ability to raise money since it is Olympic publicity that is the "product" that they sell. In fact, they had to go considerabilty in debt and it was only the financial success of the 1984 games that bailed them out. Admittedly, the USOC is not quite as necessary for centralized fundraising as it once was, but for the minor sports (think: rowing, fencing, team handball, et al) , it still plays a pivotal roll in raising money.

When I see the rest of the various U.S. sectors (businesses, consumers, government) volunteering to make the sacrifices that the athletes would be FORCED to make, then I will gladly support a boycott. I am not holding my breath, however.

-LBJ

Stillhere
April 7th, 2008, 10:52 AM
Please allow me to voice my 10 cents worth in a blunt no nonsense tone.

Boycotting the Olympic games for/based on political reasons/differences is down right stupid-hypocritical and very damaging to one of the remaining venues where we can put our differences aside and compete as friends.

Please leave politics the hell out of the Olympic Games! IMHO

tjburk
April 7th, 2008, 11:12 AM
Please allow me to voice my 10 cents worth in a blunt no nonsense tone.

Boycotting the Olympic games for/based on political reasons/differences is down right stupid-hypocritical and very damaging to one of the remaining venues where we can put our differences aside and compete as friends.

Please leave politics the hell out of the Olympic Games! IMHO

DITTO!!!!

geochuck
April 7th, 2008, 04:54 PM
Do you think the torch bearers will make it? They are running into trouble.

Can there be an Olympic Games with out the torch being lit?

Torch run cancelled in France.

San Francisco protesters want Torch run cancelled.

President Bush asked to Boycott the Opening of the Olympics.

Canadians are asking the Canadian Priminister not to attend the opening.

ViveBene
April 7th, 2008, 06:40 PM
The event's organization seems to me to be useful: demonstrators can protest a symbol, people can call on their president to do or not to do something -- it's all displacement activity, clearing the way for diplomacy to take over for opening ceremonies and the games to go on. (My take on it...)

I am interested in Beijing's response, which gives a sense of what it is to live life controlled from the center: a charge of "vile" incidents (rather than the universally accepted "regrettable"), a statement that demonstrators are isolated groups of Tibetan separatists (i.e., rogue elements), when images show plenty of Westerners along with Tibetans.

Paris has a long history of taking to the streets. I think the torch will make it. I think the heads of state will show up for opening ceremonies (except Angela Merkel, who couldn't make it from way back). I expect to see increasingly fiery rhetoric from all sides. :2cents:

The link put up by "fireguard" was interesting. Both Tibet and China have been closed societies for shorter or longer periods; it's hard to sort things out.

Regards, VB




Do you think the torch bearers will make it? They are running into trouble.

Can there be an Olympic Games with out the torch being lit?

Torch run cancelled in France.

San Francisco protesters want Torch run cancelled.

President Bush asked to Boycott the Opening of the Olympics.

Canadians are asking the Canadian Priminister not to attend the opening.

Tree
April 9th, 2008, 01:27 AM
Do you think the torch bearers will make it? They are running into trouble.

Can there be an Olympic Games with out the torch being lit?

Torch run cancelled in France.

San Francisco protesters want Torch run cancelled.

President Bush asked to Boycott the Opening of the Olympics.

Canadians are asking the Canadian Priminister not to attend the opening.

I wish they could not make it in the end.

2fish&1whale
April 9th, 2008, 08:46 AM
I read on another board that an athlete has to attend the opening ceremonies to be able to compete in the olympics, because that is where they give the olympic oath.How about the athlete who does not compete until week 2, do they have to be there? I seem to remember from other years that some athletes don't show up until a couple of days before their event. Which in Beijing would make even more sense, given the environmental conditions. So what is the rule?

geochuck
April 9th, 2008, 03:16 PM
I had a very interesting conversation this morning at Beanies coffee shop.

It was about why do we have the Olympics? The Olympics are completely political. In events that are judged most events are fixed before the events happen.

The giving of the oath, and you agree not to disrupt or say anything about China's political problems. Athletes are not going to be allowed to talk about Tibet.

The suggestion was given by a couple of the guys, why not have world championships. I agreed with these guys. Why not compete every year instead of 4 years.

They also said the Olympic games were too expensive.

Olympic Torch farce in San Francisco, a page out of Saturday Night Live.

geochuck
April 13th, 2008, 12:43 PM
How to boycott effectively the price of gas.

This was sent by a retired Coca Cola executive. It came from one of his engineer buddies who retired from Halliburton. If you are tired of the gas prices going up AND they will continue to rise this summer, take time to read this PLEASE.

Phillip Hollsworth offered this good idea.
This makes MUCH MORE SENSE than the 'don't buy gas on a certain day' campaign that was going around last April or May!
It's worth your consideration. Join the resistance!!!!

I hear we are going to hit close to $ 2.00 a litre by next summer and it might go higher!! Want gasoline prices to come down?

We need to take some intelligent, united action. The oil companies just laughed at that because they knew we wouldn't continue to 'hurt' ourselves by refusing to buy gas.

It was more of an inconvenience to us than it was a problem for them.
BUT, whoever thought of this idea, has come up with a plan that can Really work. Please read on and join with us!

By now you're probably thinking gasoline priced at about $1.00 is super cheap. Me too! It is currently $1.17 a litre for regular unleaded in my town.

Now that the oil companies and the OPEC nations have conditioned us to think that the cost of a litre of gas is CHEAP at $1.14, we need to take aggressive action to teach them that BUYERS control the marketplace...not sellers.

The only way we are going to see the price of gas come down is if we hit someone in the pocketbook by not purchasing their gas! And, we can do that WITHOUT hurting ourselves.

Here's the idea: For the rest of this year, DON'T purchase ANY gasoline from the two biggest companies, ESSO and SHELL.

gull
April 13th, 2008, 01:35 PM
This reminds me of the famous line by Claude Rains in Casablanca: "I am shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here." Suddenly the world is surprised by China's record on human rights? This should have been addressed before Beijing was awarded the 2008 games. Our politicians have no intention of severing our economic ties to China, nor should they.

fanstone
April 13th, 2008, 04:13 PM
A couple of points:

1- Depending on which side is looking at the other country, there is always some sort of "Tibet" like situation going on, such as "the troubles" in Ireland (which did not prevent London from getting the games), the civil rights in the U.S., which did not hinder L.A. or Atlanta, it is just a question of perspective or who is doing the judging...

2- Whatever the problems now in Tibet, there would surely be much more repression if not China were under a huge lens of the world's press. In other words, better to have olympics irrespective of politics. Does anyone remember why the U.S. boycotted 1980 in Moscow? Yep, the Russians invaded Afghanistan, which some might say happened twenty years later, by another super power.

geochuck
April 16th, 2008, 10:24 AM
The Olympic torch was in India today. It was a private run around the inside of a stadium. No visitors just invited guests, not for the public. What a farce.

In Pakistan today, a private viewing.

I think we need some new traditions.

Redbird Alum
April 17th, 2008, 02:07 PM
The torch tradition is not being allowed to continue as it should in our "me and mine" first world. People will use any means or media to forward their cause, or get their name immortalized, regardless of how just their cause may be or how they ruin other traditions or causes.

That is why so many good traditions, like the olympic torch, presidential / dignitarial motorcades, and other public presentations or appearances now are either outlawed or done from behind bullet-proof, police protected enclosures.

We have allowed the few to ruin things for the many, because the many must always show restraint or be chastised by the few.

Sabretooth Tiger
April 17th, 2008, 02:23 PM
The torch tradition is not being allowed to continue as it should in our "me and mine" first world. People will use any means or media to forward their cause, or get their name immortalized, regardless of how just their cause may be or how they ruin other traditions or causes.

That is why so many good traditions, like the olympic torch . . . .

Good tradition? It might appear so on the surface, but an examination of the modern history of the olympic torch relay reveals that it arose from Hitler's desire to promote the myth of Nazi superiority. It was created and staged for the Nazi propaganda film "Olympia" by Leni Riefenstahl.

Dig a little and the "good tradition" facade peels away rather quickly.

Peak a little behind the curtain.

geochuck
April 17th, 2008, 02:49 PM
The Olympics have been used for years by point counting to show supremecy.

Slowswim
April 17th, 2008, 03:59 PM
Good tradition? It might appear so on the surface, but an examination of the modern history of the olympic torch relay reveals that it arose from Hitler's desire to promote the myth of Nazi superiority. It was created and staged for the Nazi propaganda film "Olympia" by Leni Riefenstahl.

Dig a little and the "good tradition" facade peels away rather quickly.

Peak a little behind the curtain.

I'm glad someone finally got around to saying that the torch relay was invented as NAZI propaganda. There's no real tradition here. It represents millions of dead and sacrifices by tens of millions.

Put it out. leave it out. IMHO.:soapbox:
</IMG>

geochuck
April 17th, 2008, 05:17 PM
I am afraid I don't want to be around any of my old coaches. opps ment this to be in swim Rants.

Redbird Alum
April 18th, 2008, 10:47 AM
The torch relay was first considered by the International Olympic Committee for the Amsterdam Games of 1928, well before the Berlin Games. The flame was first lit at Amsterdam, and then carried on as a tradition at the remote Games sites by Los Angeles in 1932. The Germans developed the torch (using chemistry, at the time) and overcame the logistics of the "relay" in time for the Berlin Games.

If one looks to the ancient games for reference, no "flame" was involved, but messengers were relayed forth from Greece with olive branch crowns to "herald" the games (announce the dates) and announce the "sacred truce" so that all could travel to and from The Games in safety.

I believe that this "heralding" has always been the intent behind the ongoing relay, which has become more inclusive in that peoples from each country are now asked to participate.

Often it helps to do more than just "peak" behind the curtains when looking at basis for tradition.

Slowswim
April 18th, 2008, 12:11 PM
The torch relay was first considered by the International Olympic Committee for the Amsterdam Games of 1928, well before the Berlin Games. The flame was first lit at Amsterdam, and then carried on as a tradition at the remote Games sites by Los Angeles in 1932. The Germans developed the torch (using chemistry, at the time) and overcame the logistics of the "relay" in time for the Berlin Games.

If one looks to the ancient games for reference, no "flame" was involved, but messengers were relayed forth from Greece with olive branch crowns to "herald" the games (announce the dates) and announce the "sacred truce" so that all could travel to and from The Games in safety.

I believe that this "heralding" has always been the intent behind the ongoing relay, which has become more inclusive in that peoples from each country are now asked to participate.

Often it helps to do more than just "peak" behind the curtains when looking at basis for tradition.

True. I worked for the Olympic Games in Atlanta and we had to learn the history. The route picked in Germany was much more than "over-coming logistics". It was touted as Arrian (sp?) Supremacy whereever the torch went (which was Fortress Europa). The video reels the NAZIs showed to that fact were to incite the Germany's to rally.

I think Jesse Owens did more to quell that, than anything at the time!

Allen Stark
April 18th, 2008, 08:45 PM
Boycotting the Olympics is counterproductive as I said before.That said,the games need an over haul.They are supposed to be apolitical,but they aren't.I'd like to see a permanent site in some neutral place with good climate and air quality.I also would like qualifying times.If you make the qualifying time,your in.If the finals of the women's 100 free is 8 Aussies so be it,they are the fastest.

imspoiled
April 21st, 2008, 11:16 AM
Mel Stewart's comments from SwimNetwork.com & a link he included to the article on Craig Beardsley:

http://www.swimnetwork.com/articles/article/news/20080421/gold_medal_mel__the_1980_lens-10813.html

http://thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?we_cat=5&art_id=64620&sid=18548955&con_type=1&d_str=20080418&fc=8

Blackbeard's Peg
April 21st, 2008, 01:42 PM
I also would like qualifying times.If you make the qualifying time,your in. If the finals of the women's 100 free is 8 Aussies so be it,they are the fastest.

I like this idea, Allen. It would mean a lot of extra Aussies and Americans, but there are plenty of ways to rework the standards and admission rules that will not keep the meet from becoming a free-for-all that lasts forever.

As was explained to me this past week by our Barbadosian coach, there are A and B standards for swimming. If your country has never sent anyone to the olympics for that event, you don't need to make a time (aka Eric the eel). Though, once you have, you need to make at least the b cut to send one person. If you send more than one, you all need to make the a cuts. Or something like that.

A boycott is not fair to the athletes and should not ever be used again. The IOC made a mistake selecting a country based on aggressive projections for their future standards of life, which obviously have not been met. What they should have done was either tell China "NO" or award China a "future olympic games in the next x years" with the provision that they see progress by y date (and can recind the offer).

tjburk
April 21st, 2008, 02:31 PM
I
A boycott is not fair to the athletes and should not ever be used again. The IOC made a mistake selecting a country based on aggressive projections for their future standards of life, which obviously have not been met. What they should have done was either tell China "NO" or award China a "future olympic games in the next x years" with the provision that they see progress by y date (and can recind the offer).

And just why weren't you there to suggest this to the IOC?

geochuck
April 21st, 2008, 04:23 PM
The IOC has been in my bad books for a long time.

Ever since Avery Brundidge was around. http://barnesworld.blogs.com/barnes_world/2006/11/lee_evans_back_.html

ViveBene
April 23rd, 2008, 06:27 AM
Australia, now:
http://news.aol.com/story/_a/olympic-torch-arrives-in-australia/n20080423060109990013

Some highlights:

Everest climber with "Free Tibet" banner in his pack stopped by officials at Base Camp.

Ian Thorpe, a torch bearer, said "protests shouldn't center around a specific event."

China doesn't seem to understand position of its blue-clad torch contingent. Australia says men in blue are attendants only and all security rests with Australia; men in blue are subject to laws of Australia and can be prosecuted if, e.g., they interfere with citizens. China says they are there to guard the torch and can do whatever they deem necessary.

The longer the torch journey, the more we find out about China. It's fascinating.

orca1946
April 23rd, 2008, 06:55 PM
They have a long way to go, having said that , they are a lot better than they used to be!!

ViveBene
April 28th, 2008, 01:41 PM
Free Tibet flag - The Tibetan Snow Lion flag, with pretty symbols, no words - was made in China. Some have already shipped. Chinese authorities plan to step up car searches of those entering Olympics area, presumably to confiscate:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7370903.stm

geochuck
April 28th, 2008, 02:12 PM
North Korea had no protests for the torch run. I wonder why?

ViveBene
April 30th, 2008, 10:13 PM
This is pretty bad.

Story in today's Tribune: China has sentenced 30 people to jail ranging from 3 years to life for participating in riots in Tibet last month.

"It was unclear whether any of the accused had legal representation."

Sounds like summary judgment in an Orwellian state.

Regards,
VB

fireguard
May 2nd, 2008, 08:15 AM
I didn't see there is anything wrong about it. The government should punish criminals.

This is so typical. When some western medias report anything about China, it is always followed by something like this,
"It was unclear whether any of the accused had legal representation."

They don't want to miss any chance to mislead people to the direction they want. Very often when they don't have solid proof, they will make some seemingly objective vague comment but with their strong biased opinions in it. Doing so they rape people's mind without being noticed.




This is pretty bad.

Story in today's Tribune: China has sentenced 30 people to jail ranging from 3 years to life for participating in riots in Tibet last month.

"It was unclear whether any of the accused had legal representation."

Sounds like summary judgment in an Orwellian state.

Regards,
VB

ViveBene
May 2nd, 2008, 09:20 AM
It was Chinese lawyers in Beijing who had offered to serve as defense attorneys who said they did not know whether the accused had any legal representation.


I didn't see there is anything wrong about it. The government should punish criminals.

This is so typical. When some western medias report anything about China, it is always followed by something like this,
"It was unclear whether any of the accused had legal representation."

They don't want to miss any chance to mislead people to the direction they want. Very often when they don't have solid proof, they will make some seemingly objective vague comment but with their strong biased opinions in it. Doing so they rape people's mind without being noticed.

geochuck
May 2nd, 2008, 10:55 AM
The Law is the Law, what ever happened to an old phrase I once heard.

Laws are made to be broken.

Protest should be allowed as long as they are peaceful. Things did get carried away in Tibet. Who's fault is it. The suppressor or the demonstrators?

It was really bad. But now are they rounding up anyone who peacfully protests, I am sure they are. Although I do not have proof.