"We didn't vote for Bush"

[jdonn]

You want to ban pros based on political speech?

Yes I do. Just like they do in for instance football (soccer) and cricket when the authorities believe that they have brought the game into disrepute. They even impose heavy fines.

 

They don't give them warnings first. Please note that I suggested a warning that would have no effect on their livelihood if they comply.

 

Roland

In my observation that only happens when they speak negatively about the organization somehow (often about the refereeing). If it happened due to a political view that would be outrageous. These ladies didn't hold up a sign that said DOWN WITH THE WBF or THE DIRECTORS ARE TERRIBLE.

 

A better analogy would be something like the Academy Awards. Actors who win make political points and support causes during the acceptance speeches for their awards all the time. I don't know whether the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences has behavior guidelines of any kind, but it wouldn't matter because those occurrences are considered normal. No one believes they bring disrepute upon anyone, even though these are broadcast on TV all over the world! If there is a relevant difference, I don't see it.

[Codo]

jdonn this is not really true.

 

They banned soccer players in Italiy for using the "Hitler Gruss".

They had agoalkeeper banned for racial discrimination during a soccer game in Germany.

 

They had comercials during political statements at the Academic Awards and they at least discussed or already make it no longer a life broadcast. They have a small delay so that they can stop unwanted speeches.

 

But anyway, there is obviously no agreement, there are people out there who think it is nice to wear T-Shirts with "jdonn smells" or "I hate my president" and others who agree, that a price giving ceremony is no place for a debatable political statement.

[fred]

A better analogy would be something like the Academy Awards. Actors who win make political points and support causes during the acceptance speeches for their awards all the time. I don't know whether the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences has behavior guidelines of any kind, but it wouldn't matter because those occurrences are considered normal. No one believes they bring disrepute upon anyone, even though these are broadcast on TV all over the world! If there is a relevant difference, I don't see it.

I can think of 2 relevant differences:

 

1) Academy Awards are not given out to people who are acting in the capacity of "representing their countries". People who agree to represent their countries have an obligation to abide by the rules and/or codes of conduct that their counties set for their international representatives.

 

2) No doubt the Academy's rules for "proper behavior on the podium" are different from those of the WBF.

 

It doesn't matter if a person thinks the rules are stupid or what observers consider to be "normal". What matters is following the rules that you agreed to (either implicitly or explicitly) when you accepted the invitation to participate.

 

I do not know what the WBF or Academy rules are or even if they really exist. But if they do exist they should be respected.

 

You would not like it if the WBF Executive Committee was invited to your house for dinner and decided to use some place other than your toilet to relieve themselves. Furthermore, you would not feel the need to post a sign on your front door that said "House rule: Use toilet". You should not do the same thing to them when you are a guest in their house and I believe they have a right to assume that their guests will have some common sense, regardless of which rules are explicitly posted on their front door.

 

Fred Gitelman

Bridge Base Inc.

www.bridgebase.com

[hotShot]

They had comercials during political statements at the Academic Awards and they at least discussed or already make it no longer a life broadcast. They have a small delay so that they can stop unwanted speeches.

Of cause this is not to censor free speech, but to stop public nudity as displayed at the super bowl clothing malfunction.

 

The question is should such efforts of censorship be welcomed?

[jdonn]

there are people out there who think it is nice to wear T-Shirts with "jdonn smells"

I would probably buy about 10 of those shirts.

[hotShot]

1) Academy Awards are not given out to people who are acting in the capacity of "representing their countries". People who agree to represent their countries have an obligation to abide by the rules and/or codes of conduct that their counties set for their international representatives.

People who represent their counties should, represent what their county stands for.

If the come from a land that stands for freedom, freedom of speech and a demand for equality, they should represent that, without insulting their hosts.

[Walddk]

I don't have a public opinion on the actual incidents referenced here but the debates are better than the ones on TV :)

Here I have to agree. Where can we claim our salaries? B)

[helene_t]

People who represent their counties should, represent what their county stands for.

That's somewhat subjective B) Some would say that the Dutch team should then be smoking obnoxious substances (as Ron usually puts it) on the podium.

 

I'd rather say that people who have agreed to represent some organization should do so in whatever way they have (be it implicitly) agreed to represent the organization.

[fred]

1) Academy Awards are not given out to people who are acting in the capacity of "representing their countries". People who agree to represent their countries have an obligation to abide by the rules and/or codes of conduct that their counties set for their international representatives.

People who represent their counties should, represent what their county stands for.

If the come from a land that stands for freedom, freedom of speech and a demand for equality, they should represent that, without insulting their hosts.

You are saying that it is not only proper to break rules that you have agreed to follow, but that one *should* do this?

 

It is considerate of you to draw a line where it comes to insulting your hosts - that will save some embarassment if a player who thinks his country represents terrorism decides to express his patriotism on the podium.

 

But what if your hosts say "we will be insulted by any form of public political expression at our tournaments"?

 

What if, even if your hosts haven't explicitly said it, you are smart enough to know that this is how they actually feel? Is it OK to insult your hosts now?

 

Fred Gitelman

Bridge Base Inc.

www.bridgebase.com

[Walddk]

The greatest honour for an athlete is to represent one's country. I know what I am talking about, and I am sure Fred, Josh, Justin, MikeH, Wayne B, Hedy and perhaps other regular BBF posters can confirm.

 

The USA1 team members were selected by the USBF to represent .... yes, USA1! Whether you agree/like it or not, the USA1 team will be regarded as representatives of the United States of America. Consequently, every team member is obliged to behave as their country and federation expect them to. With dignity at all times.

 

You may or may not agree with all the rules, but once you have accepted to play for your country, you have agreed to adhere to the rules. In my view, the American women did not when they were standing on the podium.

 

"I will treat other players, coaches, fans, volunteers and officials with respect" must be the minimum one can ask for. If that is beyond your capability, there is only one thing to say:

 

Behave or be gone.

 

Roland

[DenisO]

The greatest honour for an athlete is to represent one's country. I know what I am talking about, and I am sure Fred, Josh, Justin, MikeH, Wayne B, Hedy and perhaps other regular BBF posters can confirm.

 

The USA1 team members were selected by the USBF to represent  .... yes, USA1! Whether you agree/like it or not, the USA1 team will be regarded as representatives of the United States of America. Consequently, every team member is obliged to behave as their country and federation expect them to. With dignity at all times.

 

You may or may not agree with all the rules, but once you have accepted to play for your country, you have agreed to adhere to the rules. In my view, the Americans women did not when they were standing on the podium.

 

"I will treat other players, coaches, fans, volunteers and officials with respect" must be the minimum one can ask for. If that is beyond your capability, there is only one thing to say:

 

Behave or be gone.

 

Roland

My sentiments exactly - the USA1 ladies have let themselves down badly with an ill conceived puerile, self-opinionated and pathetic display. It will change nothing in the political sense but hopefully Bridge authorities will ensure we do not see it's like again.

 

Denis

[Halo]

Obvious (IMO of course) not to let the last post finish the thread.

 

It is to the credit of most posters not to mention the freedom to support Hitler, the ultimate 'my country right or wrong...' position.

 

Sense of perspective called for? There is not much in the world, in the larger scheme of things, less important than Bridge.

[Walddk]

Sense of perspective called for? There is not much in the world, in the larger scheme of things, less important than Bridge.

Really? Bridge is my living, so it's pretty important for me. The same applies to Fred and many others here. And try to ask the women who were involved in the incident in Shanghai. I think bridge means a whole lot to them too!

 

Roland

[Halo]

Sense of perspective called for?  There is not much in the world, in the larger scheme of things, less important than Bridge.

Really? Bridge is my living, so it's pretty important for me. The same applies to Fred and many others here. And try to ask the women who were involved in the incident in Shanghai. I think bridge means a whole lot to them too!

 

Roland

Well, certainly wouldn't like to take the bread out of another man's mouth.

[kenrexford]

Right now, there are seven people reading the various posts about a stupid sign, and there are nine pages of posts. Almost all of it is about this stupid sign.

 

When the USBF Championships were going on, I, an American, was impressed with the fierce competition and skill level of American players. I was excited to watch USA compete in three World Championships. I have been a tad distracted by the extreme immigration to USA I and USA II teams from outside of USA, but I suppose that's what the USA is -- a melting pot.

 

Anyway, I was up until wee hours watching the matches. I was rooting for Norway and South Africa in many respects, as the historical underdog and as a Cinderella team, respectively, but I wanted "our guys" to do well. I was happy with the overall results, and a silver in the BB was very compensated by the deserving break-out success of Norway.

 

Now, nine pages of nickering back and forth about some stupid sign.

 

I think that the nine pages of bickering back and forth is unquestionable proof that these ladies made asses of themselves. I'm sure that it is quite disappointing to cheer for someone, only to have that person use their success to throw in your face that they disagree with you on some issue having nothing to do with bridge. I'm sure that it is quite disappointing to have someone with whom you agree embarass you by losing grace and dignity. I know that it is quite disappointing to click onto a post on the BBF about how well Norway did, and how proud Harald and others must be, to read about stupid signs.

 

It's like showing up at a birthday party in your honor, hearing one song for you, and then having everyone break into groups to discuss things at their place of work, things that you know nothing about, as you sit in the corner.

 

Count me for a "Shame on You" award.

[PrecisionL]

It is beyond sad.

 

I would not hire any of the Venice Team Champions to play on my team (if I had enough money that is). I doubt any worldly person needs to be reminded that actions of governments do not necessary reflect their person wishes. I am reminded of this daily as I read the newspaper and listen to talk radio. Anyway, I thought they were there for bridge, let them go back at their own expense and give interviews. Anyway, congrats for their bridge victory, commendation for their poor judgment.

 

Congrats to Norway for their excellent play! I will reread the Viking Club again.

 

It was sad to see Germany and Sabine do so poorly. :<((

 

Larry

[hotShot]

People who represent their counties should, represent what their county stands for.

That's somewhat subjective :) Some would say that the Dutch team should then be smoking obnoxious substances (as Ron usually puts it) on the podium.

 

I'd rather say that people who have agreed to represent some organization should do so in whatever way they have (be it implicitly) agreed to represent the organization.

I did not know that that's in the Dutch constitution.

 

I thought the Netherlands stand for a long tradition of tolerance .....

[Fluffy]

this is a typical situation where talking about it is just helping them on their goal, I think totally ignoring it would had been better, but what do I know.

[glen]

this is a typical situation where talking about it is just helping them on their goal, I think totally ignoring it would had been better, but what do I know.

If they had a goal, what would it be?

[cherdano]

I don't follow - they chose this wording exactly in order not to make it a political statement, but to make it a personal statement. In my opinion, "Stop Bush" or something similar would clearly have been even more appropriate than the message they displayed.

You could be right, but that would be pretty deep thinking.

 

I personally think it is more likely that the specific words were selected through lack of deep thinking.

Oops above should say '"Stop Bush" would be even more inappropriate.', of course.

 

Why would that be deep thinking? Me being European, I frequently meet US Americans who feel the need to make an apology for their current government, even though they should know better that I (as someone who has been living in the US) wouldn't associate with their government and blame them personally for X and Y and Z. And others tell me that they frequently feel the need to do so when they travel through Europe, since they get confronted with all sorts of bad feelings towards them as US citizens that should instead just be directed at the US government.

 

For me it seemed obvious that the sign was really just that, an apology saying "please distinguish between us and our government, please don't dislike us just because you dislike our government", and not a political statement. I am really surprised that so many seemed to think otherwise. (The political statement would be a waste of paper anyway, as in a completely international audience some 95% are against Bush anyway.) [And whether Aaron likes it or not, this feeling is representative for some part of the US society.]

 

Back to the important matters: besides the congratulations to Norway, USA1 and USA1 we should also congratulate Harald for winning Gerben's world championship prediction thread! Well done, I hope you celebrated your win together with those other guys' win whom you met at the airport this night...

 

Arend

[ralph23]

I know that it is quite disappointing to click onto a post on the BBF about how well Norway did, and how proud Harald and others must be, to read about stupid signs.

Indeed.

 

Congratulations again to Harald and the fine team from Norway.

[hotShot]

You are saying that it is not only proper to break rules that you have agreed to follow, but that one *should* do this?

I have not seen a rule yet they have broken.

 

If they have a contract with the USBF and broke that, it's between those two and none of my business.

It is considerate of you to draw a line where it comes to insulting your hosts - that will save some embarassment if a player who thinks his country represents terrorism decides to express his patriotism on the podium.

It's my impression that no nation stands for "breaking laws", and I would guess that breaking a law in a country where you are guest, will be seen as an insult.

 

But what if your hosts say "we will be insulted by any form of public political expression at our tournaments"?

I would hope that the WBF would reconsider to put the event there. I would not play there.

What if, even if your hosts haven't explicitly said it, you are smart enough to know that this is how they actually feel? Is it OK to insult your hosts now?

Of cause it's not OK!

I will have to inform myself better about the cultural differences or I can decide not to be guest of someone with a "sadistic" attitude.

[ralph23]

For me it seemed obvious that the sign was really just that, an apology saying "please distinguish between us and our government, please don't dislike us just because you dislike our government", and not a political statement. I am really surprised that so many seemed to think otherwise. (The political statement would be a waste of paper anyway, as in a completely international audience some 95% are against Bush anyway.) [And whether Aaron likes it or not, this feeling is representative for some part of the US society.]

I do recall when I was a young fellow travelling about in France and working on my French (being in school in Aix for a college semester), meeting some older blue-collar workers in a bar, and eventually I let them know my Dad had landed with the Allies at Normandy and so forth. That about brought the house down and needless to say, I didn't pay for anything that night and several of the men (moi included) cried over the stories. One of them had been in the Resistance and had been tortured.

 

So when people say "Europeans hate Americans" I recall, "Well, not all of them do."

[fred]

But what if your hosts say "we will be insulted by any form of public political expression at our tournaments"?

I would hope that the WBF would reconsider to put the event there. I would not play there.

The WBF are the ones who invited the various countries to send teams. They are the ones who are in charge of the tournament. They, along with the Chinese, are the tournament hosts.

 

It is proper to consider the wishes of both the WBF and the Chinese.

 

I am certain that the WBF would (strongly) prefer to have no public political statements at all at the tournaments they host, even if they have never explicitly said this. To violate your host's wishes in this area would be disrespectful. To be disrespectful is to insult ("your wishes are not worthy of my respect" - sounds insulting to me).

 

If your answer to this is "fine, then I won't be playing in any WBF tournaments", I suspect that neither the WBF nor your National Bridge Federation will be shedding any tears.

 

How about the Chinese hosts? Not being Chinese, it is harder for me to guess at how they might feel about such things. But finding out experimentally when you are a guest in their country is in itself a sign of disrespect ("we don't know your wishes, but we don't care" - insult).

 

Fred Gitelman

Bridge Base Inc.

www.bridgebase.com

[mrdct]

By the way, if the picture is to be believed it was just one person. If the others on the team are even considered for some kind of punishment that would be even larger of an outrage. What are they supposed to do, leave the stage and start booing?

You are too naive for comfort if you think that this was the work of one person. Unless "We" is "pluralis majestatis". I don't think Debbie Rosenberg is royal.

 

Roland

I don't think it's at all obviously that any of the USA1 ladies other than Debbie Rosenberg were aware that she was going to pull her little sign out.

 

From looking at photos Debbie didn't appear to have the sign in her hand until after the medals has been put around everyone's neck, the officials had stepped away and Gail Greenberg had the trophy in her hand.

 

I keenly await comment from an official member of the USBF delegation.