Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 04/13/2008 8:21:43 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: NormsRevenge
But major world figures have not, as a rule, attended every Olympics -- in the 2004 Games in Athens, British Prime Minister Tony Blair was one of the few at the opening ceremony, to which Bush sent his father.

I heard the other day that no U.S. president has ever attended the Olympics. If that's true, what a great idea to start with a country as wonderful as China!

2 posted on 04/13/2008 8:26:58 PM PDT by FoxInSocks (B. Hussein Obama: The Paucity of Hope)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NormsRevenge

(The scenes of chaos were a public relations disaster for the Olympics, with activists using the opportunity to vent their anger.)

Perhaps they could have thought of that before awarding the Olympics to a dictatorship. Any kind of black eye would reflect badly at not only China, but also at the IOC who awarded it the games. This would finally make them think twice before risking another fiasco.


3 posted on 04/13/2008 8:28:06 PM PDT by winner3000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NormsRevenge
Olympics boycott would miss the point, say organisers

As far as hitting the "point", a boycott would be, as Marisa Tomei so eloquently said in My Cousin Vinny.........


Dead on, balls accurate

4 posted on 04/13/2008 8:32:53 PM PDT by hole_n_one
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NormsRevenge

Quiet diplomacy is the cop-out.
China is a dictatorship, it will not allow athletes to make religious or political statements, still persecutes Christians and charges them with crimes which could have the death penalty, and of course, mistreats Tibet.
The IOC should never have awarded this nation the honour, and Bush should not even consider going. If it is true that no president has ever gone to an opening ceremony in another country, it is not a “boycott” to not go now, but it is appeasement if he does go.


5 posted on 04/13/2008 8:34:29 PM PDT by Apogee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NormsRevenge
Rogge said political leaders were free to decide whether to boycott the Games or not, adding: "Even if they did, that would not harm the quality and the success of the Games because the Games are about the athletes."

Speedo's strong suit New technology draws closer scrutiny as records fall

6 posted on 04/13/2008 8:35:46 PM PDT by mewzilla (In politics the middle way is none at all. John Adams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NormsRevenge
"They are against a boycott because they know that the only victims are the athletes themselves, who are innocent."

China and the Olympics would suffer more than the individual athletes. The Olympic Committee made it political when they chose China as a host nation. It's not like they didn't know what China was.

8 posted on 04/13/2008 8:56:26 PM PDT by BykrBayb (In memory of my Friend T'wit, who taught me much. Þ)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NormsRevenge
It doesn't matter who attends, what matters is who watches. If no one watches the broadcasts the sponsors will get the message and demand their money back. Eventually the IOC will learn not to stage the games in oppressive dictatorships.

This is in our hands.

10 posted on 04/14/2008 2:30:52 AM PDT by muir_redwoods (Free Sirhan Sirhan, after all, the bastard who killed Mary Jo Kopechne is walking around free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson