[QuidQuoPro]

The invested interests spend so much national wealth in preparing the Olympic Games to blandish the international, launch so much propaganda about the 2008 Olympics to gloss over official corruption and social inequality!

At the last National People's Congress session, China's Wen wowed discretionarily for the "Chinese's enthusiasm for the 2008 Olympics" - ignoring the voices of naysayers.

Many feel the GDP comes from inflation. houses and food are all more expensive. China is falling into the capitalism seen in the 1800s, before the October Revolution.

Most recent and upcoming college graduates from all over China squash in fancy metropolises, Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou, etc, while other provinces remain stagnant.

Next spring, Chinese colleges and universities expect a record 4.95 million graduates, up 820,000 from this year. More than a million of them will wind up jobless, according to estimates.

The proportion of people's salaries to GDP has been falling year after year.The M2/GDP ratio is unusually high, 200% in 2005.All money is the ruling group's money,all hardship is the mass's hardship.Fight ,or die!


"Terrible idea. Please think of the athletes"? Some athletes,poor kids,just run a risk for money at the expense of life,health!Look forward to a better world.


"We should be embracing China at every possible opportunity. What possible bad could come from befriending such a massive power"?Don't think China is going into capitalism at all.It is an officialdom-economy.And the Stalinists won't change its autarchy without pressure.

No participate in the 2008 Beijing Olympics! No watch the games! No buy the mementos! If you come to Beijing to see the games,wear a T-shirt bearing the logo above at least?


http://www.thepetitionsite.com/4/boy...ijing-olympics

[Hmwmzian]

You raise an interesting argument, but I think we must look for more practical ways to cajole China forward. Boycotting the Olympics will not change their policies, and might diminish our standing to be able to argue with them to change their behavior.

[Singukil]

Any Olimpiad must be beyond any politics!

[CelexaNY]

Politics have always been a part of the Olympics.

The world should return to the original Greek practice whereby all participants lay down arms and co-exist in a time of peace for the duration of the Games.

[kuklame]

It was a perfect tradition! But I'm not sure in possibility of this in present day.

I know, separate the politics and Olimdiad is too hard, but forward countries of the World need to make anything possible to be close to this separation.

Миру мир!

[ZIZITOPER]

Western democracies did not boycott the 1936 Olympiad in Nazi Germany in 1936 so I see little chance of there being a successful boycott against China who has such strong business links with the US and EU. Money doesn't talk, it screams, "no boycott, too costly". Business at any price. Or am I just being a grumpy old cynic?

[mr.calisto]

We should not have boycotted the Olympics in 1936, as that would have had no impact in stopping the atrocities that followed. When Jimmy Carter boycotted the Soviet Olympics in 1980, all it did is make them look stronger than us. When Ronald Reagan came to power, he understood the need to talk in a meaningful way for change based on peace through strength, and change came about. He understood he needed to say "tear down this wall" instead of focus on a "peace in our time" agenda. What's really cynical, capn, is when people opposse the kind of policies that will actually help people but will endorse ineffective policies that make you cool with the hollywood types and the hippies.

The truth is change is already happening in China. It's happening slower than we might want, but the pace is real. I think if we can continue a dialogue with them, they will become democratic. If you travel there, people like us a lot, and they admire Korea as well and clearly aspire to follow that kind of model for their development - directed at first, democratic later on. If the government doesn't give people this wish, they will lose power.

[h98hhYxM]

We should not have boycotted the Olympics in 1936, as that would have had no impact in stopping the atrocities that followed.

If it would not have had any impact at all, then it would not have caused any harm. Under those circumstances, shouldn't a decision to boycott be based on what's the right thing to do?

The Olympics have become an overblown bore. They have always been politically influenced, and now they are no longer the pure amateur competition that gave them drama. It's just a big business venture, with no spirit.

I can remember Super Bowls from decades ago, and I'm sure if football means soccer, others can remember World Cups, but does anyone remember what happened in Greece just three years ago?

[deermealec]

We should not have boycotted the Olympics in 1936, as that would have had no impact in stopping the atrocities that followed.

Firstly, you have no evidence whether it would have or not - fact. Secondly, it was already known what the Nazi's had planned for the Jews, gypsies, homosexuals, the mentally/physically disabled, the concept of Aryan Master Race and world domination. One had only to read Mein Kampf, the Nazi press, and witness the repression that was already evident in German society.
http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/pre1933.htm

The truth is change is already happening in China. It's happening slower than we might want, but the pace is real. I think if we can continue a dialogue with them, they will become democratic. Why will they become democratic through dailogue? The power in China rests with the PLA that has interests in many aspects of Chinese business life and the Chinese Communist Party - we shouldn't necessarily concentrate simply on "democracy" but more a peaceful stable China.

If the government doesn't give people this wish, they will lose power. No they won't, that's being too simplistic. Think back to 1989. http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/d...00/2496277.stm

[Junrlaeh]

If you come to Beijing to see the games,wear a T-shirt bearing the logo above at least? Where is the logo?

[selayeffethy]

I think it is this from HERE (a good BLOG HERE):

[Nifoziyfar]

Firstly, you have no evidence whether it would have or not - fact. Secondly, it was already known what the Nazi's had planned for the Jews, gypsies, homosexuals, the mentally/physically disabled, the concept of Aryan Master Race and world domination. One had only to read Mein Kampf, the Nazi press, and witness the repression that was already evident in German society.
http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/pre1933.htm

I don't want to drag this off on a tangent but the vast majority of academic thought post AJP Taylor and Alan Bullock in the 60s on Nazi Germany (revisionist and post-revisionist) would suggest Hitler did not have a plan for the invasion of Poland, Russia, the Holocaust etc. The most important book on Hitler in recent times, Kershaw's two part biography, argues that the move towards the Holocaust was the result of an increasing anti-Semetic elite and bureaucratic power struggles. Indeed, although he certainly supported the move, the decision for mechanised Holocaust (as opposed to the Einzatzgruppen) was taken by a group of civil servants at Wannsee. Even then, several of the attendees did not initially favour the extermination route.

[xanaxonlinexanax]

Where is the logo?

See my update.

[Assunkkensatt]

Get real. It never is.

Any Olimpiad must be beyond any politics!

[halyshitzob]

Olympic kow tow as British athletes are forced to sign
contracts banning criticism of Chinese regime

DAILY MAIL
By ROB DRAPER and DANIEL KING
February 10, 2008

British Olympic chiefs are to force athletes to sign a contract promising not to speak out about China's appalling human rights record – or face being banned from travelling to Beijing.

The move – which raises the spectre of the order given to the England football team to give a Nazi salute in Berlin in 1938 – immediately provoked a storm of protest. The controversial clause has been inserted into athletes' contracts for the first time and forbids them from making any political comment about countries staging the Olympic Games. It is contained in a 32-page document that will be presented to all those who reach the qualifying standard and are chosen for the team.

From the moment they sign up, the competitors – likely to include the Queen's granddaughter Zara Phillips and world record holder Paula Radcliffe – will be effectively gagged from commenting on China's politics, human rights abuses or illegal occupation of Tibet.

Prince Charles has already let it be known that he will not be going to China, even if he is invited by Games organisers. His views on the Communist dictatorship are well known, after this newspaper revealed how he described China's leaders as “appalling old waxworks” in a journal written after he attended the handover of Hong Kong. The Prince is also a long-time supporter of the Dalai Lama, the Tibetan leader.

Yesterday the British Olympic Association (BOA) confirmed to The Mail on Sunday that any athlete who refuses to sign the agreements will not be allowed to travel to Beijing. Should a competitor agree to the clause but then speak their mind about China, they will be put on the next plane home. The clause, in section 4 of the contract, simply states: “[Athletes] are not to comment on any politically sensitive issues.” It then refers competitors to Section 51 of the International Olympic Committee charter, which “provides for no kind of demonstration, or political, religious or racial propaganda in the Olympic sites, venues or other areas”.


Contention: the Queen's granddaughter Zara Phillips
stands to be among the athletes who will be forced
to sign the gagging order

The BOA took the decision even though other countries – including the United States, Canada, Finland, and Australia – have pledged that their athletes would be free to speak about any issue concerning China. To date, only New Zealand and Belgium have banned their athletes from giving political opinions while competing at the Games. Simon Clegg, the BOA's chief executive, said: “There are all sorts of organisations who would like athletes to use the Olympic Games as a vehicle to publicise their causes. I don't believe that is in the interest of the team performance. As a team we are ambassadors of the country and we have to conform to an appropriate code of conduct.”

However, human rights campaigner Lord David Alton condemned the move as “making a mockery” of the right to free speech.

The controversial decision to award the Olympics to Beijing means this year's Games have the potential to be the most politically charged since 1936. Adolf Hitler used the Munich Games that year to glorify his Nazi regime, although his claims of Aryan superiority were undermined by black American athlete Jesse Owens winning four gold medals.


Past Shame: The England team give Nazi salutes at the 1938 Berlin
Olympics, a memory which critics do not want to see recalled in China

Read more:
Shameful picture of England squad giving Nazi salute still haunts British sport. Why, 70 years later, do we still suck up to dictators?More recently, there was a mass boycott of the 1980 Games in Moscow in protest at the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. But Colin Moynihan – now BOA chairman Lord Moynihan – defied Margaret Thatcher's calls for British athletes to stay at home and won a silver medal as cox of the men's eight rowing team. Former Olympic rowing champion Matthew Pinsent has already criticised the Chinese authorities over the training methods used on children, which he regarded as tantamount to abuse. Young gymnasts told him they were repeatedly beaten during training sessions.

Mr Clegg confirmed that such criticisms would be banned under the team's code of conduct, which will be in force from when athletes are selected in July, until the end of the Games on August 24. Mr Clegg said: “During the period of the contract, that sort of action would be in dispute with the team-member agreement. There are all sorts of sanctions that I can apply. I had to send a team member home in Sydney because they breached our sponsorship agreement and that is the first time it happened. I have to act in the interest of the whole British team, not one individual. No athlete is above being part of the team. There is a requirement on team members to sign the agreement. If athletes step out of line, action will have to be taken.”

Darren Campbell, Olympic relay gold winner at the 2004 Games in Athens, said the BOA's move would “heap extra pressure on athletes”. But he added: “We are there to represent our country in sporting terms, just as our Army do when they go off to war. It is not supposed to be about politics.”

The BOA is taking a far more stringent stance than authorities in other countries. Australian Olympic Committee president John Coates said: “What we will be saying to the athletes is that it's best to concentrate on your competitions. But they're entitled to have their opinions and express them. They're free to speak.”

Jouko Purontakanen, secretary general of the Finnish Olympic Committee, said: “We will not be issuing instructions on the matter. The freedom of expression is a basic right that cannot be limited. But the starting point is that we will go to Beijing to compete, not to talk politics.”

Political gestures have been made at previous Olympics, most famously in Mexico City in 1968 when black American 200m champion Tommie Smith and bronze medallist John Carlos raised their fists in a black power salute. Both were suspended from the US Olympic team and barred from the Olympic village.

Forty years on, British athletes face similar sanctions if they highlight the abuse of human rights in China. Last night Edward McMillan-Scott, Conservative MEP and the European Parliament vice-president, predicted a public outcry over the BOA's move. He said: “Foreign Secretary David Miliband is off to China soon. But before he gets on the plane, he and the rest of the Government should tell the BOA to take this clause out of the agreement.”

Potentially the contract means that a British athlete who witnesses someone being mistreated on the way to a stadium is forbidden from even speaking to their colleagues about it. Competitors emailing home or writing blogs will also have to exercise self-censorship – or face having their Olympic dreams ruined.

Lord Alton said: “It is extraordinary to bar athletes from expressing an opinion about China's human-rights record. About the only justification for participating in the Beijing Games is that it offers an opportunity to encourage more awareness about human rights. Imposing compulsory vows of silence is an affront to our athletes, and in China it will be viewed as acquiescence. Each year 8,000 executions take place in China, political and religious opinion is repressed, journalists are jailed and the internet and overseas broadcasts are heavily censored. For our athletes to be told that they may not make any comment makes a mockery of our own country's belief in free speech.”

©2007 Associated Newspapers Ltd

[PlanTaleks]

Doesn't such a ban pretty much imply that there is much to criticize?

[Farson]

Doesn't such a ban pretty much imply that there is much to criticize?

According to press reports the ban has now been lifted.

[Qesomud]

If the athletes say from USA, Japan, Australia, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand and say France and Germany all staged a peaceful protest about basic civil liberties enjoyed in those countries and did so in Tiananmen Square, do you guys think that the PLA would try to run them over in T72s?

Just a thought.

[intisgunkas]

Spielberg pulls out of Olympics

Move marks public relations blow to China

VARIETY
By TED JOHNSON
February 12, 2008

Steven Spielberg has decided not to participate in the Summer Olympic Games in Beijing as an artistic adviser, citing the lack of progress in ending the genocide in Darfur.

The move marks a public relations blow to the Chinese government as it tries to prevent the Games from being politicized, not just on the Darfur crisis but other issues.

"After careful consideration, I have decided to formally announce the end of my involvement as one of the overseas artistic advisers to the opening and closing ceremonies of the Beijing Olympic Games," Spielberg said in a statement released today.

"I have made repeated efforts to encourage the Chinese government to use its unique influence to bring safety and stability to the Darfur region of Sudan," Spielberg wrote. "Although some progress has been made ...the situation continues to worsen and the violence continues to accelerate."

"With this in mind, I find that my conscience will not allow me to continue with business as usual," he added. "At this point, my time and energy must be spent not on Olympic ceremonies, but on doing all I can to help bring an end to the unspeakable crimes against humanity that will continue to be committed in Darfur."

Spielberg noted that the Olympic Organizing Committee had sent him a contract nearly a year ago, but he left it unsigned.

© 2008

[gypearteday]

for Spielberg.