I find Israel occasionally assholish, but I don’t agree. It’s not “taking sides” to be against the murder of any country’s athletes.
The innocent deaths are not “more significant because they happened at the Olympics” but they are certainly related to the Olympics more than other innocent deaths. As a result, honoring those athletes with a small nod wouldn’t be inappropriate.
At what point did I say I get outraged at anything? Don’t put words into my mouth. You do appear to have missed this post where I mentioned how I hated military personnel being in the London Opening Ceremony which is currently ongoing.
September 11th, no they probably shouldn’t have but in 2002 we were used to September 11th being dragged into absolutely everything. I wasn’t even aware there was a political motive to the 1996 bombing. Added to that, the bombing happened in the same city, in an Olympic park, during the Olympics. Which kind of makes it relevant and a tiny bit more appropriate.
But now that you are aware it was politically motivated you do feel that it was wrong to have a moment of silence for them. Correct? If not please explain the intellectual inconsistency.
Er… The kidnapping and murder of the Israelis occurred at the Olympics in the Olympic village.
Now, just to be clear if instead of some Jewish athletes being kiled, it had been some IRA gunmen in 1972 who’d kidnapped and murdered several British athletes, you’d object to having a moment of silence for them because that would be bringing politics into the Olympics.
Correct?
Try reading everything I wrote. It often helps when trying to understand things.
Then maybe they should have said something in 1972 then instead of all this chat about things forty years later? I may have got behind that.
Actually I wouldn’t have, I wouldn’t be born for another two years.
Ok, now you’ve completely destroyed your argument.
You began this by declaring you objected to having a moment of silence at the Olympics commemorating athletes murdered for political reasons because that would “bring politics into the sport” and now you’re claiming that they should have.
But anyway, to be clear, you’re saying that if in 1972, at the Munich Olympics, several British athletes been kidnapped and murdered by IRA guerillas and every Olympics since then refused to do anything to commemorate the slain athletes, you’d object to a “moment of silence” at the London Olympics because that would be bringing politics into the sport.
If however, I’m wrong and you would support a moment of silence for those athletes, then please explain why you’d support such a moment of silence for British athletes but not Jewish ones.
Thanks.
Because despite not liking something, sometimes it is relevant.
I’ll say quite clearly that if done correctly and tried to minimise the politics of the situation, something said at either the opening or closing ceremony of the Olympics where it happened, would not be completely objectionable.
I would not like it to be done at any Olympics after the one where it happened as that is politicising things.
Your choice of talking about the IRA is quite interesting as one thing us Brits have had to learn is that if you want peace you have to let some things go and actually talk to the people that are bombing you. A lesson that the Americans have apparently not yet learnt. So yes, I would probably not be all angry about it as, frankly, we’ve had to let much, much greater things go in the name of peace.
How so?
I’m not sure the point of this somewhat ineffectual slap at Americans since we’re not talking about a bombing that targeted Americans nor do I see what the US has to do with the current discussion.
But there’s a big difference… religious freedom is an absolutely fundamental core American value. It’s something we should not compromise, ever, and if we do compromise it, we’ve lost something crucial about what it meant to be the USA.
However, “having moments of silence to honor tragedies on their 40th anniversary” would certainly be a nice and polite thing for the IOC to do, but it’s in no way a core inalienable value built into the very bedrock of the IOC.
**Ibn, ** I’d posit that there’s your answer as for why on Earth the IOC would possibly stand against honoring the memories of Olympic athletes who were brutally murdered, while at the Olympics. Nobody, at all, is truly naive enough to think we’d be having this discussion if it was Dutch Olympians who were killed, or Brazilian, or Canadian, or Chinese, or… The crocodile-tears-claims that people "don’t want to see politics involved’, in the same breath as people arguing that maybe it’s not such an unreasonable view since Israel is “not civilized”? I’d argue that it’s a microcosm of what’s going on. Paying one’s respect to athletes murdered at the Olympic games is completely non-partisan. And it wouldn’t be an issue if it wasn’t Israelis who were murdered. ‘Why, we can’t do that, because those dastardly Israelis were involved/would like to see a moment of silence. Damned uncivilized Israelis. So let’s not make this political.’
Of course it’s the right thing for the IOC to do, especially since they never have. And because anti-Israel bigotry is politically acceptable and indeed mandatory in certain circles, it also won’t happen. A pity, but hardly unexpected.
I agree with this. And if it was an issue (such as if the victim was murdered for being gay and homophobes didn’t like it), I’d hope that people would recognise that all fault lay with those who took offence at the reminder and not those who wanted to recognise the anniversary of their death.
I would like to see the moment of silence and it would be great if the Palestinians participated in it. Palestinians didn’t kill those athletes, terrorists did. Why does Palestine have to own this event.
I take it from this post you object to having a moment of silence for the murdered Israeli athletes.
Perhaps you can explain why you feel that way.
Similarly, can we assume you’d object to a moment of silence for murdered British or Turkish athletes.
If not, please explain.
Yes, there should have been some official IOC recognition. It’s bad enough that they aren’t doing that- what makes it worse is that sense they avoided a very sensible tribute because some of the nastier Islamic regimes would complain if the international community were talking about Jews and Islamic terrorism.
Is it actually a big surprise that a bunch of wealthy country club yachting white old boys don’t give a tin shit if some Jews got killed? Jacques Rogge is a flat out racist old bastard who considers blacks fit only to serve him and Jews fit only to help him avoid taxes.
I’m not sure why you’re insulting me since I haven’t insulted you.
I’ve read everything you’ve wrote, but sadly, by your own admission, you’re commenting on issues you seem, by your own admission, to know little about,and your insights have been rather shallow and shown a dramatic lack of empathy for the victims of political violence and rather extreme ignorance on what does and doesn’t constitute a mixture of sports and politics and also a huge amount of intellectual inconsistency.
While I sympathise with what you’re saying I have a few objections.
For starters the overwhelming majority of governments that would object can’t be described by any reasonable standard as “Islamic regimes” unless one wants to claim that the UK, Canada, and Australia are governed by “Christian regimes”.
Obviously Iran is and describes itself as an “Islamic regime” but with a handful of exceptions, most of the Arab governments that would object are no more “Islamic” than the governments of most European countries are “Christian”.
Moreover, I don’t see how the killing of the Israeli athletes could be described as “Islamic terrorism” any more than atrocities committed against Turks by the PKK could be considered “Islamic terrorism” of atrocities committed by the ANC’s military wing could be considered “Christian terrorism”.
Yes, all of the Black September guerillas came from at least nominally Muslim backgrounds, but unlike members of Hamas, Hezbollah, Al Quaeda or similar groups, they never used their religious beliefs to justify their actions or their raison d’etre.
There was a moment of silence earlier in the week as part of the Olympic Truce.
I don’t really see what the big deal is. It’s not an Israeli/Palestinian thing; it’s a “are we supposed to remember the dead athletes at every Olympics?” thing. It was a tragedy. It was also 40 years ago. Are we supposed to have a moment of silence for the Romani during every Olympiad in a year ending in 6?
I just became aware of that, and that there is a memorial reception being held on Aug. 6th in London, then a ceremony on Sept. 5th (the date of the incident) at the Furstenfeldbruck airfield in Germany where the killings occurred.
So, while it’s not front and center in the Opening Ceremonies, it’s hardly a blatant snub. That comes a lot closer to striking the proper balance than I originally thought.
Yes, you’re correct, Jacques Rogge deliberately refused to have a public moment of silence for the Israeli athletes but merely a private one deliberately designed not to ruffle anyone’s delicate sensibilities.
Agreed, what would the big deal have been with having a moment of silence for the athletes murdered for the crime of being Jewish.
Considering how many people have freely pointed out that had the IOC decided to have a moment of silence quite a few people would have been pissed off, this comment is laughably naive and shows rather dramatic ignorance of the Middle East.
Moreover Jibril Rajoub, the head of the Palestinian Olympic Committee who congratulated Jacque Rogge for rejecting having a moment of silence and declared doing so would constitute “racism” would piss himself laughing at the idea that “It’s not an Israeli/Palestinian thing.”
Again, you’re making arguments that weren’t made by the people who rejected having a moment of silence so it’s quite silly to make.
Moreover, I’m not aware of any other instance of Olympic athletes who were kidnapped and murdered during the Olympics so your comment is rather disingenuous.
If some Romani athletes had been kidnapped and murdered for being Romani during the Olympics you’d have a point, but none have been so you don’t.
Once again, next time you wish to make an argument against having a moment of silence I recommend looking at the statements by the people who actually denied it since they gave far less silly and far more coherent and well thought-out reasons than you gave.
How is it not a “blatant snub”.
Rogge has all but admitted he didn’t do this publicly so as not to antagonize those for whom the Yehudi are animals to be exterminated.
As I said before, let’s not try and pretend that we’d be having this conversation if the athletes who’d been murdered had been anything but Jews.
For example, had they been British, Spanish, or Turks a commemoration would have been a no brainer.