Yikes, I thought it was a another name for Mr. Scratch. But I actually like my inerpretation better.

That's actually quite good I had to think about that reference for a while until I remembered that He has hundreds of useful and descriptive names.

No, when one posts the same tired old slogans and then uses the name of someone else that is simply laziness on the first part and thievery on the second. Take a clue from some of the more rational posts here, keep it short, no colors, learn how to link (Joerg has posted the steps at the bottom of the comments page) stay on topic and if you are Chinese then get used to the idea that everybody in the world may not love or even like you and might even say nasty things about you.

In 1936 many Americans were well aware of the situation in Germany and there was much talk of a boycott. Germany had already passed dozens of laws that made their intent towards Jews very clear. The infamous Nuremburg Laws were passed in 1935 so there was no excuse to claim that the other nations of the IOC didn't know. And the Olympic charter expressly gives the power to the IOC to move the games if the host is deemed to be in violation of the charter.

But the leader of the USOC and the IOC, Avery Brundage, at that time was known to have not just German sympathies but was acknowledged to be a Nazi sympathiser as well. Brundage's construction company had already received several contracts for buildings for either the German government or some of the international corporations, ie., Bayer and Mercedes (Surprise, Mercedes built a small number of cars in NY before the war). And later built the German Embassy in Washington. Brundage was able to parlay his political sympathies into financial rewards while at the same time not allowing even the slightest sympathy for a boycott or for the Jews.

The hierarchy of the Olympic movement has always been more comfortable dealing with dictatorships than messy democracies. The last time a city got what it wanted and was profitable was Los Angeles and the chance that will happen again is virtually nil. The IOC and the national Olympic bodies know perfectly well what kind of human rights records the Chinese had but voted for them because of a combination of lots of liquor, greed and not having to listen to the citizenry whine about the costs. Oh, and the TV rights in the US had something to do with the contract as well.

Anybody that was in favor of the boycott found themselves excluded from the team or removed from the IOC or UOC post. One of my graduate school teachers had been a modern pentathlete and was working for the USOC while still in the Army during the 30's and was subsequently banned from the Olympic movement for endorsing the boycott movement. He wasn't rehabilitated and allowed to rejoin the USOC until after Brundage died in 1975. The current leadership of the USOC were mainly anti-boycott in 1984, many getting their leg up in the movement because the spoke against the boycott, and are unlikely to have much sympathy for such calls.

I agree as the suddeness of the current events has brought up the original issue of what standards are used to select a host city. They are indeed available of the IOC website, but you have to dig and the actual contract is unavailable. But the invasion of Afghanistan occurred almost 6 months prior to the Games and allowed a boycott movement ample time to organize itself. However in the current case unless China does something even more outrageous the current Games will go on as planned. I guess if only a couple of hundred are killed no problem but when or if it reaches into the thousands then the public handwringing will really begin. But if I see one more profile of some athlete who works with blind children or cares for his mother who has elephantitis then I probably will use several batteries in the remote fast forwarding.

Avery Brundage, as you point out, was a piece of work, I met him on one occassion and heard him speak at the USOC annual convention a few times. I probably still hold some personal animus towards him as I was banned from AAU and USOC events in the late 60's and early 70's because I was a paid college coach and still competing. But he never budged on the decision to allow Berlin to host the games even when confronted by Elie Wiesel and Marty Glickman.

Joe-The NED was established much earlier that the Clinton Administration, in 1983, but he wisely continued its funding. The group originally was out of a cooperative group, both left and right, of both political parties, the US Chamber of Commerce and most importantly the AFL-CIO under Lane Kirkland who was instrumental in supplying advice, training and smuggled mimeograph machines to Solidarity in Poland. Sometimes you send F16s, sometimes you send proxies and as much as possible send copiers and how-to-canvass pamphlets.

It's not the NED that is the problem but rather the touching faith some have in the honesty and accuracy of websites. In this case Global Research which is rapidly devolving into hosting various cranks of the left and 9/11 Truthers.

Slightly O/T but I suspect that franchie has been borrowed by one of our disinterested patriots from the PRC.

All you had to do was go to the NED site and the Reporters Without Borders site and simply look for their funding sources. They are required by law to post them all on their site. So the implication that these connections are hidden is not really valid.

But I am a little confused about your claim he appears "...with his tibetan professional rioters:" considering he was not in San Francisco nor to the best of my knowledge in Paris when the worst of the demos occurred. Plus according to Salim Lanhari at Global Research Menard is owned and paid for by the Cuban exile community. I would argue that is unlikely in the extreme to be capable of both.

Reuter's has nothing to do with AlterNet which is a stand alone non-profit group founded by Independent Media Services. It is wholeheartedly of the left and once in a while publishes some interesting opinion pieces. Anytime one relies on these type of sites, left or right, then the consequences can be extremely embarassing as their motivation for publishing may have nothing to do with the truth but rather propaganda.

Were you also aware that the Mayor of Paris is a Socialist and thus criticism by the UMP can hardly be taken seriously? However since 1971 only two other people have been named Honorary Citizens of Paris, Pablo Picasso and Mumia Abu Jamal. This seems to be a honor that has more to do with upsetting some other country rather than any real recognition of the validity of that person's life. But since all three are either Communists or closet socialists then the honor does seem to indicate a certain political point of view.

And again, so what? If China and its citizens want to be considered players in the world then their tendency to cover their ears and yell "...neener, neener" might not be the wisest course to pursue. Counter the misrepresentations, if they are, with verifiable facts not opinion.