Not to diminish the truth in what President Bush says about the hope and, well, let’s call it that, satisfaction, in seeing women athletes from Afghanistan compete in the Olympics, this bit in this story threw me off:
Afghanistan was suspended from the International Olympic Committee in 1999 due to the Taliban ban on participation of women athletes.
As I watched the parade of nations last night (missed the artsy European opening, I’m afraid), Katie Couric (I think…who can tell her voice apart from Bob Costas’s?) noted how Saudi Arabia has also banned women athletes from participating, yet there their men athletes were. Double standard on IOC’s part?
Well, the IOC is one of the most venal and corrupt organizations on the planet, and I say this as a huge fan of the Olympics. [Look into the Samaranche tenure some time; truly odious stuff.] Whether they were bought off on this — or, I suppose, more bought off on this than other things — I couldn’t tell you.
We will know there is no corruption left in the world when you can’t buy off the IOC.
So the Taliban just didn’t have enough money to buy them off? Doesn’t the double-standard bother them?
Hearing this makes me very sad. An entire gender banned from a country’s Olympic team. In 2004. Criminy.
So the Taliban just didn’t have enough money to buy them off? Doesn’t the double-standard bother them?
The Taliban or the IOC? Actually, I’d suspect neither.
Would Saudi Arabia even need to buy anyone off? Isn’t it enough that they have the world energy economy by the short hairs? Were opium as critical to the short-term well-being of every nation represented in the IOC as is oil, I suspect that the Taliban would have had their men competing in Sydney (and in Athens, as we probably would never have invaded Afghanistan).
I don’t think Saudi Arabia “bans” women from competing, they just don’t actually have any. At least, that is the standard that the IOC uses. If anything, the only difference between them is that the Taliban were more honest.
I don’t think Saudi Arabia “bans” women from competing, they just don’t actually have any.
I was wondering about that distinction actually. Thanks Mario. I think you’re right. Of course then it’s an unofficial ban, the sort that is implemented by not encouraging/supporting women athletes. Phil summed my feelings about this nicely: In 2004. Criminy. One would think they’d be embarrassed.