BS: Moscow Olympics.

Subject: BS: Moscow Olympics.
From: akenaton
Date: 09 Aug 13 - 04:16 AM

An interesting situation has arisen over The Russian govts new legislation on the promotion of homosexuality to minors.

Should Western "liberal" govts boycott these games, or should it be left to the personal choice of competitors?

Subject: RE: BS: Moscow Olympics.
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 09 Aug 13 - 05:07 AM

For further reading, start Here

Subject: RE: BS: Moscow Olympics.
From: GUEST,Grishka
Date: 09 Aug 13 - 06:05 AM

Moscow? Flashback to 1980 (boycott to protest against the invasion of Afghanistan to oppress the brave freedom fighters called Taliban ...)?

Subject: RE: BS: Moscow Olympics.
From: Amergin
Date: 09 Aug 13 - 06:59 AM

True, Grishka....the Russian LGBT community is just like the Taliban....only with better fashion sense.

Subject: RE: BS: Moscow Olympics.
From: GUEST,Musket getting his tuppence worth
Date: 09 Aug 13 - 08:10 AM

One side of me supports the notion that whilst Olympics are based on national pride, they try and have always tried to be staged regardless of national opinions of loathsome government actions.

The other side of me recalls reading accounts of where the Berlin games in 1936 gave international credibility to the Nazi regime. They had found a small section of society, at that time Jews, gays, gypsies, blacks and Jehova Witnesses, and used them as scapegoats for the ills of society. Putin's laws against gay people, beatings and murders going un investigated, etc has awful parallels.

Stephen Fry, having recently been in Russia filming a soon to be broadcast documentary on the plight of gay people there, wrote an open letter to The Prime Minister and Lord Coe the other day, available on his website. He wrote as a gay Jew, whose mother lost most of her family in concentration camps, noting the respect Hitler got from his games.

On balance, and recalling their support of middle east tyrants to destabilise the West as much as their appalling treatment of their own people, Putin and co need to remember they are supposed to be leading and negotiating for their people not their egos. Sanctions and loss of international credibility are far faster effective instruments of effecting decent behaviour than attrition. Losing the Olympics may be a way forward. We have trade we cannot afford to lose including a huge gas line, but they need the dollars more than we need the gas.

Subject: RE: BS: Moscow Olympics.
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 09 Aug 13 - 08:40 AM

I wonder if the same call for a boycott would have been made against the UK when the Thatcher government introduced very similar legislation, Section 28?

Subject: RE: BS: Moscow Olympics.
From: bobad
Date: 09 Aug 13 - 09:15 AM

The International Olympic Committee is waiting for more clarifications from the Russian government on the anti-gay law that is overshadowing preparations for the Winter Games in Sochi, IOC president Jacques Rogge said Friday.

The law, signed by Russian president Vladimir Putin in June, bans "propaganda of nontraditional sexual relations" and imposes fines on those holding gay pride rallies. It has caused a major international outcry and spawned calls for protests ahead of the Feb. 7-23 Olympics in the Black Sea resort.

Rogge said the Russian government provided written reassurances about the law on Thursday, but that some elements are still too unclear to pass judgment.

"We are waiting for the clarifications before having the final judgment on these reassurances," Rogge said, a day before the start of the world athletics championships in Moscow.

Russian sports minister Vitaly Mutko insisted Thursday that Olympic athletes would have to respect the laws of the country during the Sochi Games. On Friday, he said there was no way Russia would back down under political pressure.

Referring to Western criticism, Mutko was quoted as saying by Interfax: "I wouldn't call the pressure light. Russia must understand that the stronger we are, the more other people aren't going to like it. We have a unique country."

"We don't have to be afraid of threats to boycott the Olympic Games," Mutko said. "All sensible people understand that sports demand independence, that it is inadmissible that politics intervene."
'Olympic charter is clear'

On Thursday, Mutko did make it clear that the private lives and privacy of athletes would be respected as it is guaranteed by the Russian constitution.

Rogge said that was essential.

"The Olympic charter is clear," Rogge said. "A sport is a human right and it should be available to all, regardless of race, sex or sexual orientation."

Even if Russia accepts that principle, the law leaves open the issue of athletes speaking freely during the Games.

"As far as the freedom of expression is concerned, of course, this is something that is important," Rogge said. "But we cannot make a comment on the law" until the clarifications have been received.

"I understand your impatience to get the full picture, but we haven't [received] it today," Rogge said. "There are still too many uncertainties in the text."

Rogge said the problems seemed to centre on translations.

"We don't think it is a fundamental issue," he said at a news conference following a meeting of the IOC executive board with the International Association of Athletics Federations.

Subject: RE: BS: Moscow Olympics.
From: GUEST,Musket being patriotic
Date: 09 Aug 13 - 10:12 AM

I do recall signing a petition by Amnesty International that was presented to the general council of United Nations regarding Section 28. Thatcher however, when questioned over gay bashing said it was criminal and obscene. Putin says gays deserve it and that rape of lesbians is for their own education.

I wonder which minority we can blame for a government's unpopularity? As much as I feel Cameron is weak and often misguided, I applaud him for standing up for equality insomuch as lifestyle. Ok we still await action on his rhetoric regarding equalising society but his stance is at least a start.

Subject: RE: BS: Moscow Olympics.
From: Greg F.
Date: 09 Aug 13 - 10:23 AM

the notion that whilst Olympics are based on national pride,

Not quite. The modern Olympics are based primarily on making ungodly gobs of money.

Subject: RE: BS: Moscow Olympics.
From: akenaton
Date: 09 Aug 13 - 11:50 AM

Despite the usual ranting from Ian, my point was whether a decision should be taken by participating countries or should the athletes follow their own consciences in this matter.

There is of course, no parallel with 1936.....or even the boycotts over "apartheid" in South Africa.

The legislation in Russia concerns behaviour, not race.

Subject: RE: BS: Moscow Olympics.
From: GUEST,Musket agreeing
Date: 09 Aug 13 - 11:53 AM

Yeah, national pride, as in "Sidney, Seoul and London laughing about the profit whilst looking down on Athens for making a loss."

Olympics is indeed about money. But national pride is what host nations call it. Hence the issue of giving credibility to a sinister and backward looking regime.

Subject: RE: BS: Moscow Olympics.
From: Greg F.
Date: 09 Aug 13 - 12:12 PM

Don't recall anyone boycotting the U.S. Olympics, summer or winter, despite the draconian anti-gay legislation then in effect - and STILL in effect - in a host of "Christian"[sic] states.

Funny, innit?

Subject: RE: BS: Moscow Olympics.
From: GUEST,Musket agreeing
Date: 09 Aug 13 - 12:22 PM

Gay marriage came about here after the London Olympics so we too persecuted people.

However, we are talking real persecution. Dumbfuckistan may be a stain on The USA credibility but the President doesn't support, condone or turn a blind eye to murder, beatings, imprisonment or rape on the basis of homophobia.

Bit of a different scale methinks.

Subject: RE: BS: Moscow Olympics.
From: GUEST
Date: 09 Aug 13 - 12:44 PM

There are few Walmarts in Russia (if any), which is one possible reason why there would be fewer gays in that country :)

Subject: RE: BS: Moscow Olympics.
From: akenaton
Date: 09 Aug 13 - 01:42 PM

I think the furore has more to do with Mr Snowdens actions and Mr Putins refusal to assist Muslim Fundamentalism in Syria, than any great wish to support "homosexual rights".

Subject: RE: BS: Moscow Olympics.
From: Jeri
Date: 09 Aug 13 - 02:09 PM

I suspect concern over LGBT athletes getting the shit beaten out of them or arrested may have something to do with it. At least that seems to be what's at the heart of most average (USian) folks' concern, IMO.

Subject: RE: BS: Moscow Olympics.
From: Jeri
Date: 09 Aug 13 - 02:10 PM

...although it might be the Walmart thing.

Subject: RE: BS: Moscow Olympics.
From: akenaton
Date: 09 Aug 13 - 02:13 PM

Call me cynical Jeri, but I dont think governments operate like that, politics is a very dirty "game".

Subject: RE: BS: Moscow Olympics.
From: akenaton
Date: 09 Aug 13 - 02:18 PM

Anyway....the point was...should there be a govt boycott or should the athletes be allowed to chose?

How much does "human rights" REALLY mean to governments or competitors?

Subject: RE: BS: Moscow Olympics.
From: Greg F.
Date: 09 Aug 13 - 02:33 PM

And how much do human rights mean to YOU, Pharoah? Please elaborate, in light of your cumulative posting history.

Subject: RE: BS: Moscow Olympics.
From: breezy
Date: 09 Aug 13 - 03:12 PM

The athletes themselves could embarrass Russia

But let not those who dedicate themselves for sporting glory be held to ransom

The Jesse owens factor was significant in 36, Hitler was humiliated by him.

2013 is miles away from from the thatcher era

Subject: RE: BS: Moscow Olympics.
From: Jeri
Date: 09 Aug 13 - 03:46 PM

I wasn't talking about politics, Ake.

I like the idea of the IOC banning Russia better, but then there still the issue of athletes' safety.

Subject: RE: BS: Moscow Olympics.
From: akenaton
Date: 09 Aug 13 - 04:23 PM

I dont think the IOC could ban Russia Jeri, especially as they have said that ALL competitors will be protected and treated equally.
If the IOC were to interfere in the legislation brought forward in all countries, the Olympics would never be held.

I think its all about politics, the games included!

Subject: RE: BS: Moscow Olympics.
From: GUEST,musket full stop
Date: 09 Aug 13 - 05:18 PM

I wondered how long before the rationale of the op was flushed out.

The only way Russia could treat all athletes equally would be to repeal their latest legislation.

Well done. Your vitriol towards fellow citizens is once again exposed.

I wish for a time when I can post on the same thread as Akenaton without needing to have a wash afterwards.

Subject: RE: BS: Moscow Olympics.
From: bobad
Date: 09 Aug 13 - 05:28 PM

Maybe someone could change the misleading thread title - these are not the Moscow Olympics they are the Sochi 2014 Winter Olympics.

Subject: RE: BS: Moscow Olympics.
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 09 Aug 13 - 05:46 PM

It's very simple. The IOC should look at its own rules - which preclude them recognising an event in Russia.

Wannabee Pharaoh just comes out of his slime-pit to support discrimination. Again.

Subject: RE: BS: Moscow Olympics.
From: GUEST,Ed T
Date: 09 Aug 13 - 06:22 PM

Reflecting way back back to The Nazi views on blacks,it was a great victory to see Black atheletes to defeat the best white German Nazis.

Let's not punish the hard practising athletes because of a stupid Russian domestic policy that has no chance of surviving over the long term-Olympics or not. There are more logical ways to make an impact with fewer side causalities.

Subject: RE: BS: Moscow Olympics.
From: Greg F.
Date: 09 Aug 13 - 07:00 PM

So Pharoah: what's your answer?

Subject: RE: BS: Moscow Olympics.
From: GUEST,Musket curious
Date: 10 Aug 13 - 02:37 AM

As I said, I'm in two minds about a boycott or moving the location.

I was somewhat impressed by Obama' s comments that if gay people win medals there, it is in itself a powerful statement. If Russia don't let gay people compete, it weakens their field.

On balance, it would be wonderful if, given Internet based information, the people of Russia stopped being taken in by and feeling comfortable with strong posturing disguised as leadership. They are an open society. They don't need to act like a Soviet state any more and certainly don't need a dinosaur in charge.

But that's another debate and really one for the Russians. ...

Subject: RE: BS: Moscow Olympics.
From: akenaton
Date: 10 Aug 13 - 03:27 AM

Hi Greg...I think it should be left to the competitors whether or not they go to Russia.

Many people here and in the US disagree with legislation to normalise or promote homosexuality.....I would guess more than half the respective populations. How can a government initiate a boycott and say that it speaks for "the people".
If competitors believe strongly enough that the human rights of homosexuals are being infringed by the Russian govt, they will refuse to turn up, as a mark of protest.

The whole issue is being used as a political lever by several self-interested groups

Subject: RE: BS: Moscow Olympics.
From: GUEST,Musket being patriotic
Date: 10 Aug 13 - 04:40 AM

Did you know?

Over half the population think dog racing is cruel.

Your comment that over half the population think normalising homosexuality is wrong is not only an awful lie but if it were true, it would be irrelevant. We no longer restrict people's freedom and stake in society based on their colour, Creed, gender or
Sexuality.

Are you one of those who disagree?

Subject: RE: BS: Moscow Olympics.
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 10 Aug 13 - 07:33 AM

If Mohamed Farah had the same attitude as Mahatma Gandhi, Somalia may have won it's first ever Olympic medals...and if ever a country needed a boost; instead, he has re-emigrated to the U.S.A.

Subject: RE: BS: Moscow Olympics.
From: GUEST,Tunesmith
Date: 10 Aug 13 - 08:44 AM

Once you start boycotting, where will it end!
The London Olympics, for example.
Why wasn't that boycotted because of the British presence in Afghanistan?
And, looking back in history, in 1960, for example, why wasn't there a boycott of the USA Squaw Valley Winter Olympics because of the lack of civil liberties for American blacks!
No, keep boycotts out of sport.

Subject: RE: BS: Moscow Olympics.
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 Aug 13 - 10:01 AM

As I understand the laws involved are much the same as Section 28 used to be, not involving banning gay people, but aimed at what is termed "gay propaganda". I can't see how they'd add up to the kind of discrimination that would justify any official boycott.

Evidence of approved attacks on gay people is another matter, and it sounds. A bit anecdotal, the kind of stuff you could likely assemble about a lot of countries, especially the big ones.

I have a suspicion that the Snowden affair might have quite a lot to do with this.

So far as Jesse Owens goes, I think it's as well to keep in mind what he one said "Although I wasn't invited to shake hands with Hitler, I wasn't invited to the White House to shake hands with the President either"...

Subject: RE: BS: Moscow Olympics.
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 Aug 13 - 10:02 AM

As I understand the laws involved are much the same as Section 28 used to be, not involving banning gay people, but aimed at what is termed "gay propaganda". I can't see how they'd add up to the kind of discrimination that would justify any official boycott.

Evidence of approved attacks on gay people is another matter, and it sounds a bit anecdotal, the kind of stuff you could likely assemble about a lot of countries, especially the big ones.

I have a suspicion that the Snowden affair might have quite a lot to do with this.

So far as Jesse Owens goes, I think it's as well to keep in mind what he one said "Although I wasn't invited to shake hands with Hitler, I wasn't invited to the White House to shake hands with the President either"...

Subject: RE: BS: Moscow Olympics.
From: akenaton
Date: 10 Aug 13 - 10:11 AM

Well Ian,I dont believe many of the population are at all interested in dog racing, but if some believe it is cruel thats their opinion and they are welcome to it.
Perhaps they should make the effort to come along to their local track, get to know some owners and trainers and get up close to the dogs, see how they love their racing and how well treated and healthy they are.
They might just change their opinions.

Yes I am opposed to the promotion of homosexuality as as safe and healthy lifestyle, when it patently is not so.
I am also opposed to criminalisation of homosexuals, execution, or stoning of homosexuals, or any other obscentity which you habitual cite.

And BTW, we DO restrict peoples "freedom and rights" on serious health issues.

Subject: RE: BS: Moscow Olympics.
From: akenaton
Date: 10 Aug 13 - 10:13 AM

.....and "moral" issues.(sex between close relatives)

Subject: RE: BS: Moscow Olympics.
From: GUEST,Musket curious
Date: 10 Aug 13 - 12:55 PM

I restrict your rights. You cannot peddle filthy disgusting views on your fellow citizens without me pointing it out.

Nobody restricts health rights. Decisions may be in light of financial restriction and priorities but it is not restriction of right. We have universal healthcare based on presentation and prognosis.

Being gay is the same as having ginger hair in today's Great Britain. For the vast majority of the population it always was. Now the bigots are at last outside of law as well as respectability.



Other matters. On balance and after my pros and cons thoughts above, I don't think a boycott is the way forward. Instead, as per Qatar World Cup when it comes, assurances that gay participants and spectators are welcomed. If not, then you don't need a boycott. The rules of IOC and FIFA suffice.

I agree that Olympics and politics shouldn't mix but such events are used by host nations to gain respectability so that should be borne in mind all the same. The issue of the American given asylum is irrelevant. The main push is from here in The UK.

Subject: RE: BS: Moscow Olympics.
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 Aug 13 - 02:39 PM

True we still have universal health care in the UK, though it's a bit hit and miss at times. In principle they still have it in Russia, though the quality is far worse than in Soviet times in some ways.

But of course in the US they still haven't got it.

Subject: RE: BS: Moscow Olympics.
From: Greg F.
Date: 10 Aug 13 - 04:11 PM

I am opposed to the promotion of homosexuality as as safe and healthy lifestyle, when it patently is not so.

Finally! THAT'S the answer to the question I posed to you at 09 Aug 13 - 02:33 PM, Pharoah.

Human rights don't mean shit to you.

Subject: RE: BS: Moscow Olympics.
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 Aug 13 - 07:45 PM

In principle I'm not too sure how that is too different from saying the same of smoking, or other drugs...

Subject: RE: BS: Moscow Olympics.
From: GUEST,Allen inOz
Date: 10 Aug 13 - 08:17 PM

There may be be other ways to protest

The Black Power salute is often replayed on TV

Perhaps we could encourage the participants to wear rainbow ribbons at the opening and closing ceremonies.... and when receiving medals.

It will be remembered for many years and recorded on film for all time

Just a thought

AD

Subject: RE: BS: Moscow Olympics.
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 Aug 13 - 08:46 PM

Of course the athletes who gave the black power salute had to pay a pretty high price, to what should be the lasting shame of the Olympic and US authorities (though I've never heard there has been kind of adequate apology for that, and of course those responsible for that treatment have of course never been penalised).

But I can't see how anything like that could be done in face of athletes with rainbow colours. Though I would imagine it would be tricky for those from some countries.

Subject: RE: BS: Moscow Olympics.
From: GUEST,Musket curious
Date: 11 Aug 13 - 03:08 AM

Kevin. Although peer pressure may be ultimately strong, smoking and drugs are choice. Most gay people when writing about their lifestyle say it is much stronger than that. Not being gay I couldn't say, but have no reason to disbelieve.

Wearing rainbow colours fits with my view that it should go ahead. In fact the publicity around their draconian laws abusing human rights wouldn't have the international focus without the upcoming games.

Mrs Musket and I ski and hitherto were looking forward to using the resort after the Olympics. We most probably shan't give Russia tourist income now. A pity because we skiied Whistler before and after the last games and the infrastructure to places that Olympics offers goes much further than the games. (Although Sheffield is still paying for the world student games now, and most of the stadia are crumbling. ..)

Subject: RE: BS: Moscow Olympics.
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 11 Aug 13 - 08:31 AM

Many smokers and other drug users do seem to think that "it is much stronger than that".

I believe that we should move radically in the direction f decriminalisation of drug use generally, but that it is perfectly reasonable for people to oppose any kind of propoganda for use ( as opposed to campaigning for decriminalisation) and that should not be equated with prejudice against drug users, of which there is far too much.

Essentially the same holds good in relation to certain gay lifestyles.

Subject: RE: BS: Moscow Olympics.
From: GUEST,Musket evolving slowly
Date: 11 Aug 13 - 10:35 AM

It may be wise to reword that in case people think being gay is an affliction that can be cured. If you or I can be cured of heterosexuality then gay people can be cured too.   Cured to what? Celibacy? Why? Being straight? Then I can be cured of not fancying a woman I don't find attractive.

Everybody wants to be 1 to 1 with someone. Overnight or for life the feeling is the same. Why deny a hard wired need just because it isn't yours? Those who talk of procreation as an aim must all every one of them never had any form of contraception and hoped for a baby every time in their lives that they have orgasmed.

Thought not.

Subject: RE: BS: Moscow Olympics.
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 11 Aug 13 - 01:06 PM

"Why deny a hard wired need just because it isn't yours? "

Fair enough. People rarely seem to recognize that as applying in the case of some drug use.

In everything people do there is likely to be a combination of "hard-wired need" and choice. Insofar as choice is involved it's not unreasonable to point out that some choices are riskier than others.

Subject: RE: BS: Moscow Olympics.
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 11 Aug 13 - 01:36 PM

From: WalkaboutsVerse - PM
Date: 10 Aug 13 - 07:33 AM

If Mohamed Farah had the same attitude as Mahatma Gandhi, Somalia may have won it's first ever Olympic medals...and if ever a country needed a boost; instead, he has re-emigrated to the U.S.A.

Is this 'breaking news'?
I hadn't heard that he'd stopped representing the UK!

Subject: RE: BS: Russian Winter Olympics.
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 11 Aug 13 - 02:04 PM

I see this thread is still marked up as Moscow Oympics, though there is not likely to be another Moscow Olympics for a great many years.

Subject: RE: BS: Moscow Olympics.
From: Greg F.
Date: 11 Aug 13 - 02:42 PM

So, Kevin, you equate being Gay/Lesbian/Transgender with drug addiction and/or a disease? What makes you think that being Gay/Lesbian/Transgender is a "choice"? Did you "choose" to be hetero- assuming you are? Did you "choose" your hair color or eye color or sex?

Is this you, or neanderthal Catholicism speaking?