I support the protest of the olympic torch processions

[creekster]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

the lack of a boycott is barely news. A boycott is huge news. Come on. This is simple.

Look at the protests this week. In every country a new story and a new protest. If we boycott it is big news ONCE. Compare that to 2 or 3 or 10 or 20 athletes that pull out a tibetan flag, or talk about repression in interviews, or go home and dis the Chinese. Come on. This is simple.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by creekster

This is a fine point, and we are really on the same page, but are you suiggesting that anything short of grabbing the torch would not have generated the publicity that we saw this week? Or, put otherwise, was it only the fact that some one tried to grab the torch (as oppsoe to dousing it with water, or blockign the route, etc.) that led to the publicity we saw?

No- I am lumping all torch dousing/grabbing incidents together. I think you may be breaking this down a bit much.

[creekster]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

No- I am lumping all torch dousing/grabbing incidents together. I think you may be breaking this down a bit much.

True, I just would like to see slightly more restraint by some of the more agressive protestors is all.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by creekster

Look at the protests this week. In every country a new story and a new protest. If we boycott it is big news ONCE. Compare that to 2 or 3 or 10 or 20 athletes that pull out a tibetan flag, or talk about repression in interviews, or go home and dis the Chinese. Come on. This is simple.

You may be right on this. I want whatever will shine the brightest light on human rights abuses. But a delegation that will follow the Olympic rules will not shine a light on anything.

If I'm president there is a freaking Tibet flag on every US uniform. Or a black armband.

[creekster]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

Interesting. From the organizer of the boycott.



http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle...037DB048C.html

Here is his answer to the primary question:

RFE/RL: Do you think the 1980 boycott was a success?

Ledsky: Well, I don't know [if it was] a success. It was a major embarrassment to the Russians. The Russians have never forgotten it. The Russians were very angry that this boycott was organized -- or the attempted boycott was organized. And I think it was a serious blow to the Russians and to the prestige of the Olympic Games in 1980. They suffered a lot of financial losses and they were deeply embarrassed that people did not come. And I think that in 2008, the idea of a boycott because of what is going on in Tibet, because of how the Chinese have behaved on human rights issues, has a certain appeal. I mean, I'm not in a position where I would say it was a good thing to do or a bad thing to do, but I respect those, like the French, who are beginning to talk about the inability to participate fully if the Chinese do not stop their human rights violations

This is from the guy who directed the 1980 boycott. That is quite the ringing endorsemnt. Besides, what esle do you expect him to say?

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

You may be right on this. I want whatever will shine the brightest light on human rights abuses. But a delegation that will follow the Olympic rules will not shine a light on anything.

If I'm president there is a freaking Tibet flag on every US uniform. Or a black armband.

What is the source of your assumption that every single athlete and every single delegation will follow the rules in China? What about every single journalist and every single Chinese citizen? The Olympics is the greatest spotlight to ever shine in China. I suppose we could turn that spotlight off and all walk away, but what would that gain us or those in China? The answer with China is to make the spotlight burn brighter. Like I said, I will bet you any amount of money you want that the delegations are not 100% silent on the issue of human rights or Tibet.