They don’t have to hold a minute of silence for an event that happened forty years ago, but the reasoning “not wanting to take sides” is about the worst I’ve ever heard. They don’t want to take sides between murdered athletes participating in the Olympics and the terrorists that murdered them?
The '72 Olympics should have ended right then and there.
Probably too much TV money involved for that to happen.
There’s that too, yes. People like that do get uncomfortable with Jews and how they’re always making their Jewishness an issue. 
I think this is a tedious nitpick that doesn’t address the point. I tried to be polite in restricting my comment to just a few governments, but yes, I think all of the objecting governments would be from majority Muslim countries. I assume you don’t disagree.
Then call it terrorism by Muslims. The objections don’t change, and the reasons behind the objections don’t change either (although it may be fair to include ‘organizers don’t care about Jews’ as RickJay said).
Was there something published as an official response to the request that you can link to? I have to wonder if “didn’t want to take sides” is their actual rationale or some convenient sophistry dreamed up by the media as shorthand for the response.
Because I can’t see that there is another “side” to memorializing murdered athletes and a ruined Olympic event.
However, everything I’ve ever read about the IOC suggests they are a large group of corrupt dicks, so it wouldn’t terribly surprise me that they would come up with a convenient excuse to avoid any possible controversy.
I thought it was clear in the context, but I was saying that it’s not the identities of the victims so much as the uniquely predictable result of inflamed tensions, along with an increased possibility of violence.
I also thought I made it clear that that’s unfortunate and is a cop-out, but not altogether unreasonable in light of the priorities of the games.
Posting drunk last night?
By priorities I assume you mean making bales of money by selling amateur athletics to to commercial sponsors.
As you’ve gone on record arguing that statements like “Jews control United States foreign policy” isn’t anti-Semitic, and in fact claimed it was correct and factual, perhaps you should not be accusing someone of drunk posting for stating that an accusation that someone is unable to perceive events properly simply because he’s Palestinian is a racist accusation.
So it’s unfortunate, it’s a cop-out, it’s wrong, but because money is involved, it’s all right.
Check.
The more I think about it, the more racist the IOC really is. They were fine with letting the Lebanese boycott the Israelis during judo practice - a screen was erected. I’m trying to imagine what would happen if someone said they’d refuse to train with a lesbian or black person. Gosh, the Dope would be all up in arms. But anti-Jewish or anti-Israeli sentiment? NBD! Nothing to see here!
No, you made a racist assertion and I called you on it.
What you said was no different that saying “Of course he said that, he’s black” or “of course he said that, he’s Jewish”.
Seriously?!? :rolleyes: At least selectively quote me, or something, so that it’s not so obvious that you are completely misrepresenting what I said.
Someone let me know when the Olympics are over in order that I may cease ignoring them and be able to watch TV again.
While Really Not All That Bright’s allegation that you were posting drunk was somewhat inappropriate for this forum, your accusation that his post was racist is also inappropriate and seemingly groundless, which I presume is why he asked if you were drunk. (It was an allegation of bias, but not racial.) Knock it off with the allegations of racism, and while we are at it, once again you need to stop telling other people their posts are stupid or make them look stupid.
Yes, I do disagree.
Lebanon is most certainly not a “majority Muslim” country. According to it’s official statistics(admittedly not that reliable) it roughly evenly split between Muslims and Christians and, by law, the President of Lebanon has to be Christian.
Lebanon is far more hostile to Israel than most Arab or Muslim countries. Not only does it refuse to recognize Israel, refuse to allow Israel to appear on maps, and refuse to allow Israeli passport holders to enter, but it’s one of the few remaining Arab countries which refuses to allow people to enter who have Israeli stamps on their passports.
Arab Christians are, with rare exceptions, as hostile to Israel than Arab Muslims.
When discussing the relations between Arabs and Israelis it’s better to think of it as Arabs vs. Israelis than Israelis/Jews vs. Muslims.
Anyway, my point was that most of the “regimes” you referred to shouldn’t be described as “Islamic”. Yes, that is true of Iran, Saudi Arabia and a handful of others but certainly not Lebanon, Morocco, Syria, Iraq, or most of the others.
Except it was just an accident that all the Palestinian guerillas were Muslim. Roughly 10% of all Palestinians are Christians and there were a number of actions that could be considered “terrorism” that were committed by Palestinian Christians. For example, many of the guerillas who hijacked airliners during the 70s, such as Leila Khaled, were Christians.
If it weren’t for them and people like them you’d be writing in some other language. French, German, Spanish, take your pick.
So then my saying to Finn “Of course you support Israel, you’re Jewish” or to Mr.Dibble “Of course you’d like Barack Obama, you’re black” wouldn’t be racist assertions?
I ask because such comments aren’t substantive different than RNATB’s claim
Yes, his assertion was racist just as his claim that “Jews control US foreign policy” was anti-Semitic.
That doesn’t mean he himself is necessarily racist, anti-Semitic, stupid, or even a bad person.
Anyone I do find it interesting that you feel the need to mod note me for calling a racist assertion a “racist assertion” but you don’t feel the need to mod note him for accusing me of posting while drunk.
I didn’t accuse him of racism, I said he made a racist assertion, that’s a comment on his argument not him personally.
Moreover, it’s both ridiculous and hypocritical for you to make such a statement when you have ruled that it is permissible to accuse others of making racist, sexist, or homophobic arguments and when you and other mods have even said it’s permissible to call other posters racist, sexist, or homophobes so long as it is a description of the person’s beliefs not an insult.
Calling a person’s post “stupid” is a comment on their argument and their post, it is not a personal attack or insult.
Disagree with the OP – many nations participating have more than enough reason to ask for one.
That said, if the Olympics were held in Germany, yes of course, for more reasons than one.
Terrible analogy. And once again, I have to remind you not to argue with the moderators in this forum. If you absolutely must protest, do it in ATMB.
Find a way to comment on their arguments without calling them stupid, moronic, or something similar. You’re correct that we allow this once in a while, but you have a chronic habit of using those kinds of words.
Maybe. So what?