The UK and Israel: saline or not?

Today’s ‘Positive and Optimistic Sunday’. David Cameron (pictured) [1] has been the UK’s Prime Minister since last May. A few days ago the UK Jewish News published the first exclusive interview Cameron, as PM, has given to a Jewish media outlet. Here’s the full interview [2] and a précis [3].

Regarding Iran’s (delusional) protest that the 2012 Olympic Games emblem spells the word ‘Zion’) [4, 5], Cameron said: 'It's completely paranoid. If the Iranians don't want to come, don't come, we won't miss you.’ He added that athletes unwilling to compete against Israelis wouldn’t be welcome at the Games.

He said it was ‘absolutely appalling" that IDF soldier Gilad Shalit has been captive by Hamas for nearly five years…[and]…He should be released unconditionally’.

Asked whether Britain would recognize a unilaterally-proclaimed Palestinian state if there was no other solution by September, he replied with a resounding ‘No’.

And so on.

I’m old enough to know that politicians aren’t above the odd bit of lying. Or at least the odd bit of truth bending. Indeed as a breed they’re partial to it. When it suits them to do it. Which usually depends on whose company they’re in at the time. So perhaps Cameron’s Jewish News interview should be taken with a grain of salt [6]. But at this time in history when Israel’s increasingly isolated and beleaguered, she and her supporters must grasp at every straw, including this one, and declare: How positive and optimistic is that.

farmdoc's blog post number 521

Sport. It’s defined as ‘physical activity engaged in for pleasure’. Or similar. Most sport is just this. But elite sport most definitely isn’t. Somewhere way back when – I don’t know exactly but during my lifetime, elite sport morphed into an amalgam of business and entertainment. And at the exact moment it arrived at that destination, my interest in it dwindled to almost zero. Just a flicker. Arguably at the pinnacle of so-called elite sport (aka elite business and entertainment) is the Olympic Games. If you thought its governing body – the International Olympic Committee – is a sensible, rational and reputable body, you’d be wrong. That’s what I think, anyway. Witness its recent decision to include women’s boxing in the 2012 London Olympics. Boxing’s the only ‘sport’ I know whose primary aim is to injure one’s opponent [1]. And if possible to render him/her unconscious. That’s barbaric. Inhumane. Objectionable. I’m pleased the AMA, which I’m a member of, has condemned the IOC’s decision. As has the BMA. It’s true men’s boxing has long been an Olympic ‘sport’. Probably because of this longevity, it’s difficult to remove it. But adding women’s boxing varies the status quo. The IOC’s decision has no direct impact on me. But it’s subjecting the competing women boxers to potentially disastrous consequences. Including death. Shame on you, IOC.

farmdoc's blog post number 115

Last Friday the Games of the XXIXth Olympiad began in Beijing. The slogan of these Olympic Games is One World One Dream which, the official website says, ‘fully reflects the essence and the universal values of the Olympic spirit – Unity, Friendship, Progress, Harmony, Participation and Dream. It expresses the common wishes of people all over the world, inspired by the Olympic ideals, to strive for a bright future of Mankind’. Grand and inspirational words indeed; but maybe defiled last Saturday when an Iranian swimmer didn’t compete against an Israeli in a 100 metres breaststroke heat, alleging illness. I see that in the Olympic Charter, one of the ‘Fundamental Principles of Olympism’ is ‘Any form of discrimination with regard to a country or a person on grounds of race, religion, politics, gender or otherwise is incompatible with belonging to the Olympic Movement’. Therefore the International Olympic Committee must exhaustively investigate this matter. If it finds the alleged illness did not exist, then it must immediately expel the Iran National Olympic Committee from the Association of National Olympic Committees on the grounds that the swimmer’s withdrawal was due to ‘race, religion, politics’. If the IOC doesn’t act in this way, there’s no alternative but to conclude that the Olympic Movement is unfaithful to its principles and ideals, morally deficient, not credible, and doomed.