Comments

• 

  Roaring Lovely November 17, 2022 at 1:49pm

  

  I would say that the only usage of sports in a manner that doesn't promote unity is discriminations, such as banning Palestinian flags in stadiums while allowing Ukrainians etc. These are the disgusting things that are being done, and we should zero in on this. But simply allowing a 'BLM' claim without banning a corresponding 'WLM' claim, does nothing to create divisions. In fact it promotes unity!
  
  In fact they always do lip service to 'a political sports'. When they zero in on an issue, eg 1968, it is always a double standard.
  
  But we don't need to be apolitical to promote unity anyway! All we need is to be truthful. Anchor your political stand in truth, and you promote unity! Anchor your 'apoliticalness' on a lie, and you promote disunity! Thus TRUTH not POLITICS or a lack thereof that matters.
• 

  Roaring Lovely November 17, 2022 at 1:36pm

  Using a sporting event to condemn racism is perfectly in line with using sports to promote unity amongst nations, since racism undermines unity amongst pple. Furthermore racism makes games bad, and so affects the very sport itself.
• 

  Roaring Lovely November 17, 2022 at 1:32pm

  Drekx said,
  "I would say that international sporting events were first designed by the Greeks and Romans, to bring nations, or imperial provinces, together in celebration...When the concept was re-introduced to the world, in Athens, Greece, 1896, the SPIRIT OF FRIENDSHIP was the intent..."
  
  In what sense then does raising an issue relevant to the absence of one or two nations, in the event intended to 'bring nations together in celebration' inconsistent with the spirit of unity and friendship amongst nations??
  
  Raising awareness pertaining to unfriendliness towards a certain group of pple is perfectly in line with the spirit of of friendship and unity amongst nations. If games were meant to promote unity amongst nations, then it is hard for the same games to be indifferent to issues that divides pple, let alone 'criminalize' any other attempt to bring that unity!!
• 

  Drekx Omega November 17, 2022 at 12:54pm

  

  We could also conjecture the converse, to what you stipulate in your suggestion:
  
  "Why do pple write books about such a thing as 1968 event? Was it so extraordinary thing to merely protest against racism in a sporting event, more extraordinary than apartheid still being practiced in 20th century??" End quote...
  
  I would say that international sporting events were first designed by the Greeks and Romans, to bring nations, or imperial provinces, together in celebration...When the concept was re-introduced to the world, in Athens, Greece, 1896, the SPIRIT OF FRIENDSHIP was the intent...That and enjoyment of competative sports, between athletes and through them, nations...
  
  The converse was actually first introduced during the Berlin Olympics of 1936, in which nations did not demonstrate against the Nazis, but rather gestured political support for them, by using the Nazi salute, as they passed Hitler...Even the English did this at the time, which caused outrage....
  So the politicization of sports, at international and national levels, causes frictions, and that leads to tensions....Hitler used 1936 as a grand demonstration to the world, of how "superior" his Übermensch were, albeit, in the process made his cause rather stunted, by the good performance of black athletes, such as Jesse Owens....
  Again, causing anger in the German crowds and anger in the visitor guests...Hitler's disapproval of Owens success, were most obvious and highly political....
  
  So, like 1968 and 1972, a BAD EXAMPLE, not in keeping with the spirit of unity, that the Games were supposed to promote, between nations...
  
  Some British athletes politicized the Games of 1936, in just as an idiotic way, as American athletes did in 1968....Different causes, but the same fanaticism...
  
  https://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/07/19/08/2AA31DE200000578-3166...

  
• 

  Roaring Lovely November 17, 2022 at 11:43am

  

  But after saying all those, I must say the issue of whether or not it is right to protest in sports is not my main point. My main point is that why waste a lot of time on such a petty thing? Why do pple write books about such a thing as 1968 event? Was it so extraordinary thing to merely protest against racism in a sporting event, more extraordinary than apartheid still being practiced in 20th century?? Which one is more wrong? The condemnation or the bad habit that was being condemned?
  
  Even with that, no one talked of bombings in Bolton marathon!! If we don't want politics in sports, then bombings in stadiums should be what we are spending more time condemning, not some mere gesture that did not harm anyone!! But we find them still saying '1968 was the most political thing in sports'. In other words it is more than a terrorist attack in a stadium??
• 

  Roaring Lovely November 17, 2022 at 11:21am

  Protesting against killing innocent pple is not a 'political protests'. It can possibly be no more wrong to do that than to advertise Coca cola in a stadium. Why not say 'we are too neutral to allow a favour of one drink against another'??? If we wish, we could politicize any issue, and ban it off stadium!! But this will lead to destruction of sports!!
  
  Why can we use sports to advertise toxins but not to advertise morals and/or ethics??
• 

  Roaring Lovely November 17, 2022 at 11:14am

  Drekx said:
  
  "These political protests at sporting events are anti-social and designed to offend and hijack, what should be a neutral and apolitical international festival of sports, between nations...It is good manners to respect others, by not protesting your cause, valid or not, at a medal ceremony..."
  
  I disagree with this! If someone has a VALID cause, being 'neutral' is no longer a morally justifiable stand. 'Neutral' does not always mean 'more ethical'. True, they have a 'right' to create any of those so called 'neutral' things. But this doesn't mean they always deserve the respect.
  
  
  Sports are not 'apolitical' in the sense that politics affects sports. No Palestinian has ever won a medal, for instance, and every sporting event, in fact EXPRESSES this political reality! They cannot thus boast to us that 'they are apolitical'. There is no such a thing in the society!
• 

  Drekx Omega November 17, 2022 at 9:58am

  Roaring said: "When someone merely raises his arm in stadium or wherever, to protest racism or whatever, what crime have they done? Why is this condemned more than when someone open fires in public may be to express his anger?"
  
  
  Drekx response: These political protests at sporting events are anti-social and designed to offend and hijack, what should be a neutral and apolitical international festival of sports, between nations...It is good manners to respect others, by not protesting your cause, valid or not, at a medal ceremony.....Or on a pitch, with the inane kneeling, which frankly looks and is, STUPID.....
  Yes, freedom to protest at the ballot, by voting...Or taking part in a demonstration in a street...BUT, when these fanatics disrupt events such as the Olympics, it becomes highly disagreeable....There have been even worst examples of this madness, such as 1972 and Black September, Munich.....
  It is not going to win and hearts and minds to your supposed cause...In fact, the Munich massacre caused the world to absolutely turn against the Palestianians.....
  Whether it's Black Panthers, Black September, or Black Lives Matter, the sporting event should not be hijacked for political advantages...And in practice, causes the public and wider world, to switch off interest and support...
  
  http://cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/120727105203-munich-terrorist...

  
• 

  tossybear November 17, 2022 at 8:31am

  

  I have a question but not sure if you honor me an answer. There’s a man named Eli on I think how you spell it and he’s saying sshtar is planning to ascend all life forms on earth if bombs go off.. I’m very worried if u are aware of a ant the government made in Labatory and other creatures.. to destroy humans except there one percent… Those fire ants they created are very deadly to any living species in there path must be destroyed .. I maybe seam a little different than the others . But I seen and study things I guess others never paid attention to.. but fire ants, was created in a laboratory before I was born.. they have spread in 70 form west in California to east Florida. As far north as Midwest.. they eat every thing. They are a mix gens of a termite and man eating ant and a sugar ant.. the queen lay 6000 a day in eggs.. calculate the growth.. the queens fly. They start out as eggs. Then worm then ant they must be destroyed than the democrats are planning the stead of the zombie virous they made they chemtrailing us people with there sick ness they created .. we need help .. a. We have not the money . Please make me a super women I’ll try to stop them some how.. we need assit super powers or leave this planet but alert fire s ants dinasours s the greedy men made to get rid of us common people .. alert fire ants must be destroyed do not ascend those …
• 

  Roaring Lovely November 17, 2022 at 8:30am

  When someone merely raises his arm in stadium or wherever, to protest racism or whatever, what crime have they done? Why is this condemned more than when someone open fires in public may be to express his anger?
  
  No! If 'rules' of Olympics or whatever forbids people from peacefully expressing themselves over whatever issue, then who should care about Olympics anyway? What we should be protesting against is those rules meant to go way round the anti-tyranny of the constitution. We should boycott the Olympics itself etc for attempting to silence pple! Those 'rules' are not inspired by the same spirit that inspired the constitution.
  
  But maybe if I use Twitter, Facebook etc banning of Trump etc, my point will sink more to some pple. The constitution provides for freedom of speech. If you respect the constitution, then neither would you erect an organization that forbids freedom of speech nor moraly support any such organization. Pple should not group pple with the aim of infringing on 'freedom of speech', such as they did in Twitter. But the 'conservatives' too should not cheer organizations (including stadiums) that try to stiffle freedom of expression, now that what they want to express is unpopular amongst the 'conservatives'. They should be consistent, if they are to make a good point.