18 March 2008
Having the Heads-of-State skip the Opening Ceremonies would send a great message. I like this even better:
The Olympic rules forbid any open protest or political expression by the individual athletes, and rightly so. They are there to compete and represent their country, not to try and set foreign policy. They can protest or give interviews all they want before and after the Olympics, but should keep their personal politics to themselves while competing.
I like the thought of everyone skipping the Opening Ceremonies, athletes and world leaders, but it should be an individual decision and they should keep their reasons to themselves until after the Games are over.
Final Question: Why is this idea coming out from the European Union?
Posted by: Stashiu3 at
23:56:40
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 212 words, total size 2 kb.
Final Question: Why is this idea coming out of the European Union?
Because it's ineffectual? Because they're using St. Jimmeh as a role model?
As I've snarked elsewhere, sure, it worked so well in 1980, why, 9 years later the USSR fell and it was all because of the boycott!!!
And as I saw someone note at Ace's today, Nazi Germany fell just 9 years after the '36 Olympics. So in 9 years commie China will become democratic!!!!
They should never have given them to the Chinese. It's like that Dean of what, Columbia? who attacked Ahmadinejihad after inviting him. I thought that was petty, if he felt that way he should have boycotted the speech and said why or kept him from coming, not attack him in that childish manner.
The only difference between a boycott this year and 1980 is that in 1980 the people being screwed were pretty much all under 20 and were most likely never going to get the chance again. Now? Many are pro-athletes and will likely be back in 4 years.
Posted by: Veeshir at 19 March 2008@10:50:12 (zXUuJ)
Posted by: Stashiu3 at 19 March 2008@11:51:17 (Q5ggV)
I would suggest that any boycott makes you look ineffectual, weak and useless. Again, that's why the EUnuchs are for it. That's their specialty.
Denying the commies the Olympics in the first place was the way to go. I mean, is anybody really surprised that China murders dissenters?
Since they gave them the Olympics in the first place, they tacitly approved of the detention and murder of political dissidents, to act all upset about it now is just lame and an exercise in trying to convince me they are Shocked! Shocked! I tell you that commie dictators are oppressive and murderous.
My favorite was the local despot saying that the security forces didn't carry guns and most of the dead were either killed by the rioters or died while trying to escape. That's what cartoon/Hollywood villains say.
Posted by: Veeshir at 19 March 2008@12:33:41 (zXUuJ)
I would just as soon stop having the Olympics if countries like China can host them. It makes a mockery of what the Olympics were intended to represent. The fact that professionals were allowed to compete was bad enough, the whole program is a joke now. I don't watch any of it on TV and probably never will. I don't see the point.
Posted by: Stashiu3 at 20 March 2008@02:35:06 (Q5ggV)
Number of Unique Visits Since 08 March 2008
59 queries taking 0.0413 seconds, 104 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
