IOC Admits Muslims Prevented the Honoring of Murdered Israeli Athletes

[Odysseus]

Arroyo, since you are lurking, here is an unanswered question from the last time that you spent any time here, just in case you'd care to explain yourself.

I misunderstood your comment. I think that we can agree that her cause is to have the IOC officially commemorate the Munich murders, whose victims included her husband. However, if you believe her cause to be something else, what might that be? And what motivation would there be for not commemorating the atrocity?



Of course you do. There is no dichotomy. The first question, whether or not you think that Mrs. Spitzer lied about what Rocce said, is a simple yes or no. She is either telling the truth about what Rocce said, or she is not. If she is telling the truth, then you have to weigh whether the statement indicates that the IOC was motivated by antisemitism. Given that she is claiming that the IOC president specifically said that his hands were tied by the Arab/Muslim states, and that these are certainly anti-semitic states (Many of them will not even permit a Jew to enter their borders), then it is reasonable to assume that if the IOC is being forced to toe their line, then the IOC is complicit in advancing the antisemitism of those states, and her accusation is correct. Certainly, the corruption and greed part is, right?

I realize that you enjoy evading direct questions like that, so that you can then pretend that we are accusing you of holding positions that you don't hold, but it gets tiresome for the rest of us. If you do not want to get into whether or not you believe Mrs. Spitzer, then let us concede, for the sake of argument, that Mrs. Spitzer is telling the truth about Rocce's statement. Do you think that the IOC is correct to refrain from an official act of remembrance (Costas is not an IOC official, and his mention of the murders is not an IOC-sanctioned remembrance)? Or, are you going to reject this question, as well?

[Arroyo_Doble]

[L]et us concede, for the sake of argument, that Mrs. Spitzer is telling the truth about Rocce's statement. Do you think that the IOC is correct to refrain from an official act of remembrance (Costas is not an IOC official, and his mention of the murders is not an IOC-sanctioned remembrance)?

I mentioned earlier in the thread that I supported the minute of silence.

[Odysseus]

I mentioned earlier in the thread that I supported the minute of silence.

That is not what I asked. Was the IOC correct to accede to the demands of those who opposed the moment of silence?

[Arroyo_Doble]

That is not what I asked.

Really?

Do you think that the IOC is correct to refrain from an official act of remembrance...?

I said no. Very early. I was clear in my support for the moment of silence. Not sure why you are being so weird about this whole thing other than just general dickishness.

Was the IOC correct to accede to the demands of those who opposed the moment of silence?

So you have a new question.

OK. Why not?

No. I don't think the IOC should accede to anyone's demands. Are we done here? Can we move on to something that happened in the Fall, maybe?

[NJCardFan]

Are we done here? Can we move on to something that happened in the Fall, maybe?

Maybe if you answered the question when it was asked we would have moved on in July.