Photo of the Day

From Yahoo!:

Tibet activists hang up banners on the Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco, California, April 7, 2008. Three pro-Tibet activists scaled the cables of San Francisco’s famed Golden Gate Bridge and hung banners to protest the arrival of the Olympic torch in the city on Wednesday. (Kimberly White/Reuters)

The Chinese Olympic situation presents a dilemma. On the one hand, China has an abysmal human rights record and the international community especially should stand up to them about their recent crackdown in TIbet. But on the other hand, the IOC knew of China’s human rights problems when China was awarded the games. Boycotting the Olympics would do little more than punish the athletes who have worked their asses off to get where they are.

Certainly, the Soviets didn’t withdraw from Afghanistan as a result of our boycott of the Moscow Olympics in 1980 and a similar boycott wouldn’t move the Chinese on Tibet.

Would an international boycott (consisting of international leaders and athletes) of the opening and closing ceremonies be the answer by sending a strong signal to the Chinese government while still allowing the games to take place?

Advertisements

5 responses to “Photo of the Day

  1. None of this matters to China. I dont think they really care what a bunch of people do when they disrupt the torch relay…..dont these people have jobs or are they more the full time protester type?

  2. I think we should probably just go ahead and participate. Gestures are pretty empty when China owns a big chunk of US debt and most of the products sold in this country are made there. I really don’t see the point drawing the line at the Olympics. If all countries that dislike each other’s behavior made it a practice not to participate, the Olympics would cease to exist.

  3. Yeah….it matters so little to China what happens during the torch relay that they’ve actually got guys running along side the torch to douse the flame before the protesters can do it.

    China cares so little, they formed the “29th Olympic Games Torch Relay Flame Protection Unit.” The OGTRFPU, as I shall call it, is described as a para-military organization whose members are plucked from the ranks of Chinese Internal Security. And no, I am not getting this from the Onion, but the AP.

    As for the “professional protesters” swipe and the tired, haggard inquiry as to their employment status – let’s say, arguendo, that they don’t have jobs and are, however we are to define the term, professional protesters. How precisely does this dilute the efficacy of their protest and/or message?

    As for the “Don’t they have jobs” remark – great point, Grandpa Simpson.

  4. Zen, your point about China owning such great amounts for US debt is critical; why should we provoke them over something as petty as the Olympics? If we end up offending them, I hope it will be over more substantive issues.

  5. GB, the “professional protester” thought makes me think of the “professional blogger” meme.

    Sure, there are some people who make some money off of activist groups, just as there are a few bloggers who earn decent cash for their efforts.

    But the term “professional protesters” implies that there are people making a living out of hanging banners on the Golden Gate Bridge, just like “paid bloggers” who somehow earn fat cash by writing pro-Obama comments on Daily Kos.

    Ugh.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s