Hmm, the most under-reported story at the Olympics was the forfeiture of an Iranian wrestler who either decided not to fight or was told not to fight an Israeli fighter. Those who have picked up on this story are few, but interesting.
First read this well-reasoned rant by Alan Dershowitz that appeared in the NY Daily News.
My favorite editorial piece comes out of Canada and adds some dimension to the argument.
The key to this editorial is the fact that the Iranians imprisoned a female Canadian photojournalist (as mentioned in the piece) and beat her to death in prison while she was helpless.
“Our policy is not to recognize the Zionist regime in any international event,” Abdollah Ramanzanzadeh, a spokesperson for the Iranian government, told a news conference in Teheran yesterday.
“We cannot accept the presence of anyone in international events under the flag of that regime.”
That regime? Almost funny, coming from this regime, a state that put the `T’ in totalitarianism, and beats female Canadian photojournalists to such a pulp that they die in prison from their injuries, a crime for which, golly, nobody is found guilty.
When they say “international event” does that mean that local events are OK? Does that make sense?
I would argue that the possibility exists that the Iranians were actually afraid of losing. This is not the first time something like this has happened. A few years back the entire Stanford Rugby team refused to play a game against the University of California because, get this, “they didn’t want to get hurt.” So they forfeited. If rugby players, of all people, didn’t want to get hurt, then it’s possible for anyone to have this fear. And if they would pound to death a helpless female photographer there must be something wrong culturally. The wrestler, meanwhile, is now praised as a “hero!” To be honest I suspect, like any athlete, he wanted to compete.
Hero? I wonder how he feels about it.
related story:
Haaretz – Israel News – Article
I’m sort of outraged, too, how underreported that story is. Iran should be suspended/kicked out of the IOC for this. It’s disgraceful.
The only place it got any play was on Jon Stewart’s, the Daily Show!!
It’s awful. Since I “do” judo, I’ve been following this story. It makes me sick and disgraces the sport. The statement from Buck Wessel compounds it and he’s an embarrassment to U.S. Judo. Unbelievable.
I’m not sure what bothers me more: the fact that Iran did this, which, honestly, doesn’t stagger the imagination, or the fact that there is hardly any uproar about it. I thought Dershowitz’s analogy to a white and a black athlete was apt.
What? The Olympics are going on??
As you know he’s a Judo player *not* a wrestler.
Same games, different sports, different people.
Does anyone understand how supporting Israel in this context is a “right” issue, vis a vis Marty’s comment?
I imagine Marty’s analogy arises from past Olympic and international sports boycotts of apartheid — as practiced before Israel joined the ranks of practicioners.
Re: the Dershowitz quote
Good lord Marty, are you serious? For those that don’t know, Marty is quoting the movie, Reversal of Fortune. Now, clearly, quoting a movie is problematic, particularly when it isn’t the person he claims is saying it (played by Ron Silver). There are all sorts of mediating factors between what Dershowitz actually said, and what ends up in a movie.
But given that it is a movie, Marty makes it worse by omitting the most important line in the entire exchange:
Alan Dershowitz : Reminds me of my Hitler dream. You know, Hitler calls up, he’s alive… needs a laywer. I say, “Sure, come on over.” Then I have to decide: do I take the case, or do I kill him?
Elon Dershowitz : You? No question.
Alan Dershowitz : I would take the case.
Elon Dershowitz : THEN kill him.
The entire point of that scene was to show that Dershowitz would have killed Hitler anyway. As one reviewer writes, “Alan isn’t sure whether to agree or kill him, eventually following the pragmatic route of taking the case then killing Hitler later. ” http://www.film.u-net.com/Movies/Reviews/Reversal_Fortune.html
Marty’s decision to omit the most relevant portion of the exchange is telling in just how far he’s willing to go to try and argue his points. It’s pretty despicable.
And then Marty goes on to completely avoid his previous point which was thoroughly refuted and just cites a web page that attacks the book. Not attacks the book to disprove that it’s pro-Israel. Just an attack on the book in general.
Marty, who gives a shit if Dershowitz is correct? I don’t. My point is that he isn’t pro-Arafat, or anti-Israel. If he has crappy arguments or plagiarizes to make them (as the web page argues), really has no bearing on your original point and the refutation. Indeed, the page even strengthens the refutation by showing that Dershowitz was willing to give $10k to the PLO if he lost a bet.
And that page, attempting to debunk Deshowitz, is pro-Palestine! They even write, “literate brilliance penned by the late great Edward Said” in case you missed the gist of the page. Since I’ll assume you don’t know who that is, Said was one of the most well-spoken and respected proponents of the Palestinians. (does saying that make him “my boy” too?)
So , in summary, to support your argument that Dershowitz is anti-Israel and pro-Arafat, you site to a movie where Dershowitz says he’d kill Hitler, and then to a pro-Palestine website that attempts to refute Dershowitz’ pro-Israel book.
Am I on camera? Is this a joke?