Champions in Hypocrisy

Many congratulations to the brilliant sportsmen and women from Team GB who made it such a memorable weekend for Britain at the Olympics. Well, if British politicians were competing in Beijing, we all know what event they- and their US counter-parts would be excelling in. Here's my article on the glaring double standards of the British and US governments, from the Morning Star.


There are 28 sports in the Beijing Olympics. Hypocrisy isn’t one of them- but if it was- then the US and Britain would surely be battling it out for the gold medal. For when it comes to double standards, these two past-masters make everyone else look like also-rans. In the last few days, they’ve been in particularly sparkling form.

After just one day’s fighting between Georgian and Russian forces, the US and Britain were calling for an "immediate ceasefire".

Could this be the same US and Britain, who repeatedly rejected the widespread international calls for an immediate ceasefire during the 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict?

The US and Britain also say that they support Georgia’s "territorial integrity".

Could this be the same US and Britain who, by championing Kosovan separatism showed nothing but contempt for the ‘territorial integrity’ of Serbia?

In addition, the US has condemned Russia for what it calls its "dangerous and disproportionate" action against Georgia.

Yes, that’s right, the country which launched ‘Shock and Awe’ against a largely defenceless and impoverished Middle Eastern nation five years ago-on a wholly fabricated pretext-- accuses others of taking ‘dangerous and disproportionate action’. Chutzpah really isn‘t the word.

The US has also accused Russia of seeking "regime change" in Georgia. That’s rather like John McEnroe accusing another tennis player of being impolite to the umpire.

When it comes to seeking "regime change" the US are undisputed world champions- they’ve toppled regimes from Belgrade to Baghdad, from Tehran to Tblisi. The US is to regime changing what Casanova is to making love- no one has done it more often.

Of course, what underpins the US and British hypocrisy is a colossal arrogance. It’s an arrogance which seeks to extend NATO to the doorstep of Russia. Imagine if Russia was encouraging Mexico or Canada to join a Russian-led military alliance, and 1,000 Russian troops were engaged in exercises in Mexico as US troops were only last month in Georgia? Or if Russia announced it was to site a missile defence system in Jamaica- as the US has done in the Czech Republic and Poland?

It’s sad to see so many journalists in America and Britain fail to challenge the attitudes which underpin the blatant hypocrisy of their country’s foreign policies. Do they honestly think that different standards should apply to the US and Britain for everyone else?

The US and Britain claim to be keen supporters of democracy, but when the electorate don’t vote the ’right way’ whether it be in elections in Palestine or in Belarus, they call the vote invalid.

Ninety-nine percent of people in South Ossetia voted for independence from Georgia, but as far as US and Britain is concerned, the "territorial integrity of Georgia" should be maintained. In Kosovo though, a majority in favour of independence is enough to gain US and British support for secession. At the same time, the wishes of the Serbs in Republic Srpska to join up with Serbia have been ignored.

It seems that self-determination, like democracy, is a principle to only be selectively applied as far as these Olympic champions are concerned.

British Armed forces Minister Des Browne has called Russian military action in South Ossetia "deplorable". But the most "deplorable" thing of all is the breathtaking double standards of the United State and its most loyal poodle.

Miss Pettigrew Will Live Forever

"Surely it's scientifically impossible to find a more charming film than Miss Pettigrew Lives for a Day", says the First Post review.

Well, I certainly can't remember seeing a more charming film.

"Everything you could possibly want in such a movie is here: the Cinderella-esque transformation, the simmering cat-fights, the wonderful costumes, the fabulous music... light and airy and sweet, it's a perfect little souffle of a movie."

I can only concur- 'Miss Pettigrew Lives for a Day' is the best- and most enjoyable- new film I have seen since Peter Bogdanovich's superb 'The Cat's Meow', a few years back. Like 'The Cat's Meow', Miss Pettigrew is wonderfully old-fashioned, the sort of film that Hollywood used to make- before the 'special effects'/ let's put as much violence into a film as is possible' brigade took over. It's a film for those who don't really like modern films and who are sick and tired of ultra-violent, soul-destroying crap being served up as 'entertainment'.

If you haven't seen it yet- head on down to your nearest cinema/movie theatre asap- you're in for a real treat. And if you read it- then ignore this terrible Daily Mail review of 'Miss Pettigrew' from Friday. The person who wrote it clearly hasn't got a heart.

A Bad Week for Russophobes just gets worse....

They've not only seen their pin-up boy in Georgia suffer a humiliating defeat; even the British horse-racing results are going against them......

Russophobe of the Week Award

It's time to announce a new award. The barrage of hysterical, completely O.T.T. articles/comments re 'the Russian threat', in the light of Russia's perfectly legitimate and proportionate action to stop ethnic cleansing and genocide in South Ossetia, made me think it's time to hold a contest for 'Russophobe of the Week'. The competition is intense and it's been a difficult task to draw up a short-list. Below are some of my favourites (I particularly love 'Stan anti-fascist's) ; if there are others you'd like to include, please post them in the comment box, along with your votes, in a 1-3 order.

May the best (or rather the worst) man win!

1.

"This is the end. Columns of Russian tanks are heading Tbilisi. Georgians who are still alive retreat to their capital city to defend it and die. The president of the dying country is still heard pleading the world to save his country and people, whose only fault was to trust the West and have chosen democracy as way of life. In response, Mr. Bush repeates (sic) he condemns Russia. The other Western powers, in order to conceal their fear, keep pretending they believe the satanic Russian lies about the true situation that was cooked up for the start of long planned destruction of Georgia. This is the end. Evil and Lie have won. The world is near its end".

‘Stan anti-fascist’, comment left on Denis Matyjaszek's Daily Telegraph article- 'We must unite to resist Russian aggression'.('Stan'- many congratulations, you have redefined the phrase 'drama queen')

2.

"For Georgia, read Czechoslovakia. For South Ossetia read Sudentenland. For Russia read Germany. For Vladimir Putin, read Adolf Hitler. For 1938 read 2008".

By Bruce Burniston, comment left on Denis Matyjaszek's Daily Telegraph article.
(and for Bruce Burniston, read 'man who enjoys making absurd historical analogies')

3.

"Today we are all Georgians."

US Presidental Candidate John McCain. (what do Californians or Texans think of this???)

4.

“This autumn will mark the seventieth anniversary of the Munich Agreement, when the democratic powers of Western Europe, Britain and France, weakened as they were by the self-hating, ’anti-war’ defeatism of wide sections of the Western chattering classes - on the left as well as of the right - allowed a fascist, expansionist imperial power to carve up a much smaller and weaker multinational state, using the excuse that it wanted to protect the rights of its co-nationals…... For the first time since World War II, the democratic West is faced by a brutal, neo-fascist, expansionist regime in command of an imperial state whose military might is comparable to that of Hitler’s Third Reich.”

Marko Attila Hoare, writing on his 'Greater Surbiton' blog (I must say I find Marko's boyish enthusiasm for the neocon cause quite endearing, in a funny sort of way. Marko once told me that he received no payment at all from The Henry Jackson Society, the neocon pressure group of which he is 'European director': I find that quite scandalous considering the amount of work he does propagandising for the cause).

5.

"Vladimir Putin has dropped - literally - a bombshell. By ordering a full-scale military invasion of Georgia, he has revealed the true face of his autocratic rule. By flying in person to the scene as if he was field commander-in-chief, he is showing the world that Russia will revert to being a military power willing to bully and threaten its neighbours."

Denis Matyjaszek, Daily Telegraph (er....what 'full scale military invasion of Georgia, Denis?).

6.

"As so often with bullies, the Russian government's behaviour disguises deep insecurity and a craving for respect. This makes it more susceptible to our opinions than we often think. Further aggressive steps against Georgia would certainly be a reason to reconsider whether Russia should continue to enjoy the prestige that comes with membership of the G8. Another possible response ties in nicely with our current Olympic obsession. Russia is due to host the Winter Olympics in 2014 at Sochi and hopes to use the event, like the Chinese, as an expression of its power on the world stage. There would be very good grounds for asking the International Olympic Committee to consider whether a country that was actively working to dismember a neighbour only a few kilometres from Sochi was an adequate standard-bearer for the Olympic ideal."

David Clark, from the (anti) Russia Foundation, writing in The Guardian. (David is no relation, I'm very pleased to say).

7.

"You can talk about 1938; you can talk about 1914; you can even, if you want to show off, talk about 1811-12: what is in no doubt is that, several times in the modern era, the course of history has been changed by an escalation from the sort of opportunistic bullying we have seen in Georgia, and only a fool would say it would not be again. Faced with the choice of having to switch off the lights at 8pm in the winter while putting on a thicker sweater, or having a nuclear holocaust, I know how I would prefer the West to make its point against this aggressor".

Simon Heffer, Daily Telegraph. (Sorry Simon, but I don't think I'll be joining you in switching the lights out at 8pm).

Dirty tricks at the Olympics?

This article of mine appears in The First Post.

'Who judges the judges?' is one of the oldest questions in jurisprudence. It's a question that has particular relevance in Beijing after some highly controversial decisions in the first week of the Olympics.

Chinese shooter Hu Binyuan appeared to miss at least one - and possibly three - of the clay targets in yesterday's double trap event, yet was still awarded full points by local judges, enabling him to win the bronze medal. Australian competitor Russell Mark, who finished fifth, claimed that the boisterous home crowd had influenced the judges' decision.

In boxing, British bantamweight Joe Murray was incensed after judges awarded victory to Gu Yu, his Chinese opponent by 17-7. "The judges took it away from him," Murray's coach Terry Edwards protested. "I thought they were very generous to the Chinese lad. You expect a slight bias, but you come to the Olympic Games and expect a level playing field."

The British complaint came just hours after a Ukrainian protest against their lightweight Oleksandr Klyuchko's controversial 10-8 defeat by another Chinese fighter, Hu Qing. "I thought the Chinese opponent was not very good," Klyuchko said. At last year's world championships Klyuchko had easily defeated Hu Qing 26-13. The judges in the boxing were not Chinese, but a wildly enthusiastic home crowd may have played its part in swaying their verdicts.

Eyebrows have also been raised by the high marks awarded to Chinese contestants in both the synchronised swimming and diving events, even when performances were far from flawless.

The complaints have not just concerned biased judging but also alleged gamesmanship by Chinese officials. The US women's gymnastics team coordinator Martha Karolyi accused the Chinese of continually disrupting team captain Alicia Sacramone's preparations, claiming they contributed ther slipping up on the balance beam, and to America's defeat by China in the final. "First they called her [Sacramone's] name up, then they did not even put her name up even though the Chinese had finished... She was mentally prepared and then she had a mental break, then after not doing the job on the beam, her concentration for the floor exercise was bothered."

Sour grapes? Perhaps. But there is a tradition of host-country bias at the Olympics.

To this day, South Koreans are still mystified as to how their boxer Kim Dong-Kil was adjudged to have lost 4-1 on points to America's Jerry Page at the 1984 Los Angeles Olympics, despite having outclassed his opponent.

In the 1980 Moscow Games, television pictures showed Russians opening the giant doors at the end of the stadium behind the javelin throwing area when the Soviet thrower was competing and closing it again when he wasn't; the idea being that the draught funnelled through would give the javelin a bit of extra lift.

And 100 years ago, in the first London Games, there were angry American complaints after their runner John Carpenter was disqualified by British judges after winning the men's 400m having been adjudged to have blocked the British runner Wyndham Halswelle.

The problem it seems is one of prestige. Host countries desperately want to win as many gold medals as they can. When showcasing a political system is part of the equation - as in Moscow in 1980, Los Angeles in 1984 and Beijing today - the pressure is even greater.

Banning judges from officiating athletes from their own country, as recommended by Australian Olympic Committee president John Coates, in the light of the double trap shooting controversy, is clearly a sensible idea.

But even when only neutral judges are allowed, as in boxing and judo, arbiters have historically shown bias towards competitors from the host country. The problem is not just one of cheating. It's that everyone wants to please the Olympic hosts just that little bit too much.

Support The Exile- the man who gives you the truth

Well, the last few days have seen a barrage of Russophobic and wildly inaccurate articles in the western media about the situation in South Ossetia and Georgia. With one or two exceptions, our airwaves and television news bulletins have been full of reports all spouting the same misinformation- about how Russia was invading Georgia, how Russia was the aggressor and how 'plucky little Georgia' was under grave threat. But our friend The Exile was having none of it. He called the conflict right by mainly taking with a huge lorry load of salt, all the press releases coming out of the Georgian Ministry of (Mis))Information. The Exile spent all his weekend blogging about South Ossetia, and the quality of his posts were terrific. Unlike many of the 'experts' and 'analysts' who gave the western public such a misleading impression of what was going on in South Ossetia over the last few days, The Exile is not a rich man and he's put up an appeal on his blog for voluntary donations so he can carry on providing such an excellent service to readers. Please try and support him if you can, even a fiver would be hugely appreciated.

A match that should not be played

Tonight Standard Liege of Belgium play Liverpool in a Champions League Qualifying Tie. It's a match that should not be played. Standard defender Oguchi Onyewu explains why:

"I'm sure a lot of Belgians feel it is unfair that the Champions of a country have to play a qualifying round to get into the Champions League".

I'm sure a lot of people outside Belgium, and in Britain too, agree with him. Liverpool finished fourth in last season's Premier League. They should be playing in the UEFA Cup, not the Champions League. I'm not anti-Liverpool- I've long admired the club- but I am totally against the current Champions League format which is ridiculously biased towards the teams of Europe's richest leagues. I'm old enough to remember when teams from smaller European countries like Belgium got to European Cup finals. But that won't happen again until we scrap the current Champions League format.