Antidoping Officials Are Expected to Ask That Russia Be Barred From Rio Olympics.
Source: nyt
Antidoping officials from at least 10 nations and 20 athlete groups are preparing the extraordinary step of requesting that the entire Russian delegation be barred from the Summer Olympics over allegations of a state-sponsored doping program, according to email correspondence obtained by The New York Times.
The antidoping officials and athletes were expected to pressure Olympic leaders on the matter as soon as Monday — less than three weeks before the opening ceremony in Rio. They were waiting for the results of an investigation into claims published in The Times of a state-sponsored doping program conducted by Russian officials at the 2014 Sochi Olympics.
Grigory Rodchenkov, Russia’s former antidoping lab director, told The Times in May that he followed government orders to cover up the widespread use of performance-enhancing drugs by dozens of Russian Olympians at the Sochi Games. At least 15 of them won medals, he said.
Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/17/sports/olympics/russia-doping-summer-games-rio.html?
= new reply since forum marked as read
So, you continue your distortions. I never posted any filth from rense, I linked to an article inadvertently while I was making a joke about Putin and The Vatican both killing people that cross them. As you know, that article was on a plain page and was about a Caatholic Archbishop that was accused of corruption at the Vatican Bank.
You know this, because it was explained to you TWICE, but since your stock in trade seems to be distortions I suppose we all can expect you to continue to distort reality.
Now about your "point" that RT is somehow a totally odious news source that has no place here on DU, lets examine that.
Yes, thanks for the EXCELLENT examples. One was a badly done "satire" in inexcusably bad taste, another had a German talking head being fired once it was shown he was actually a neo-nazi, and the third one was some strange Illuminattii piece that I still can't quite figure out. Yes, they certainly seem crappy and anti-semitic to differing degrees.
But is your OUTRAGE SELECTIVE? yes it would seem so. Shall we look at examples of anti-Semitism in US and Western sources and compare them?
Let's.
"Fighting Anti-Semitism in the Media
As a long-time member of the Global Forum for Combating Anti-Semitism’s Working Group dealing with Anti-Semitism on the Internet and in the Media, HonestReporting Managing Editor Simon Plosker will be presenting at the 5th Global Forum for Combating Anti-Semitism that opens Tuesday evening in Jerusalem.
Prominent examples of recent anti-Semitism in the media that HR has dealt with include:
An anti-Semitic cartoon implying Jewish control over the U.S. government in The Economist.
Israel depicted as a demon by a German newspaper.
The Independent’s headline referring to a “Jewish lobby” and a description of this lobby being “multi-tentacled.”
The BBC’s Tim Willcox stating that “Palestinians suffer at Jewish hands” while covering the aftermath of a terrorist attack on a Jewish supermarket in Paris."
http://honestreporting.com/fighting-anti-semitism-in-the-media/
Wow, that's from ONE article about the UK press. Shall we look at those accusations? Let's.
"Shades of Anti-Semitism in The Economist
An article in The Economist examining the Iranian nuclear deal barely mentions Israel. So what was the magazine thinking when it published this cartoon to accompany the article?
economistcartoon0114i
The cartoon is clearly meant to imply that both U.S. President Obama and Iranian President Rohani are being constrained in their efforts to reach out to each other. In the case of Obama, the U.S. Congress is portrayed as the proverbial ball and chain.
But take a closer look. Two Stars of David appear, one in the outer rim and the other located directly over the eagle symbol.
Note that this is not an Israeli flag but a Jewish symbol. Is the cartoonist implying that Congress is under Jewish control?
Jewish control over governments, the media and the international financial system is a classic feature of anti-Semitism and the cartoon is, wittingly or unwittingly, promoting this trope.
This falls firmly under the working definitions of anti-Semitism from both the U.S. State Department and the EU, which specifically include:
Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective — such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions.
Perhaps this never occurred to the cartoonist or the staff of The Economist. It should have.
UPDATE:
Within hours of publication of this post, The Economist removed the offensive cartoon from the article and added the following:
Editor’s note: The print edition of this story had a cartoon which inadvertently caused offence to some readers, so we have replaced it with a photograph.
More coverage in The Times of Israel.
However, the cartoon still appears on The Economist’s Middle East page"
http://honestreporting.com/shades-of-anti-semitism-in-the-economist-1/
OMG, THAT IS SO BAD. It seems as blatantly anti-semitic as the links YOU posted. SO, according to YOU, we should also barr The Economist as we do RT. OK, fine. But of course we don't.
Shall we continue? Lets. Let's look at the article where Israel was depicted as a demon by a German newspaper.
"Success: Monster Cartoon – German Newspaper Apologizes
German daily Süddeutsche Zeitung’s anti-Semitic cartoon that portrayed Israel as a ravenous monster rightly caused outrage. Many of you wrote to the newspaper to express your anger.
As a result of the pressure and publicity generated by HonestReporting and a number of other concerned organizations (HR is cited in this Jerusalem Post report), Süddeutsche Zeitung has backed down and apologized. Here is a rough translation from the original German:
There was significant criticism and outrage at the illustration on the “The Political Book” page on July 2. As we have already written in the Süddeutsche Zeitung and Süddeutsche.de, we deplore the use of this illustration. It was an unsuccessful attempt to represent by means of caricature, how the State of Israel is seen by her enemies.
This intention was not clear. The drawing of a horned monster with a knife and fork did not make the connection to the symbolism of anti-Israel clichés. On the contrary: The illustration allows for the conclusion that we are depicting Israel as a monster. It was a cliché used to denounce stereotypes, and that did not work, even though the caption attempted the explanation.
We are very sorry we have made this mistake. And we ask those we have hurt or annoyed to excuse it. This also includes the illustrator Ernst Kahl, whose drawing was used in this context, although it was actually made for a cooking column. We will be very careful that such an error is not repeated.
In light of the newspaper’s previous denials that the cartoon had been nothing more than a “misunderstanding,” it is significant that it has now recognized exactly why the publication of this cartoon was so patently unacceptable."
http://honestreporting.com/success-monster-cartoon-german-newspaper-apologizes/
So, of course we need to add the German daily Süddeutsche Zeitung to the list of barred source, no?
Let's do one more, since you gave three examples,so should I. Let's look at the Independent’s headline referring to a “Jewish lobby” and a description of this lobby being “multi-tentacled.”
"The Independent Changes “Jewish Lobby” Headline
UPDATE 9/3/2014: A reader sent us a link to a cached version of Mira Bar Hillel’s column that includes the now-deleted “multi-tentacle” reference.
Mira Bar Hillel’s obsessive campaign against Israel in column after column for The Independent continues. Bar Hillel, to recall, is an expatriate Israeli who hates the country of her birth so much that she wrote about how she is on the brink of burning her Israeli passport. She has even admitted that she is prejudiced against Jews.
In her latest piece, she launches an attack on a so-called “Israel lobby” in the UK in a virtual repeat of a Channel 4 Dispatches investigation in 2009 that uncovered nothing untoward beyond Angl0-Jewry exercising its democratic right to advocate for Israel.
The MediaGuido blog got a screenshot of The Independent’s original headline before it was quietly changed:
While The Independent may have realized that it had crossed a line with a headline referring to “powerful Jewish lobbies,” Mira Bar Hillel was less bothered, as she demonstrated on Twitter."
http://honestreporting.com/the-independent-changes-jewish-lobby-headline/
Well there ya go, three examples of anti-semitism in the Western press. And of course both thee Independent AND The Economists are "AAccepted reliable sources" here on DU. Amazing, no?
Look, that was all from THE FIRST article I found on anti-semitism in the media. There are tons more examples. Let's look at a nice article that discusses anti-semitism through out the media in Europe:
"ANTI-ISRAEL AND ANTISEMITIC THEMES IN EUROPEAN MEDIA PRESENTED AT HEBREW UNIVERSITY CONFERENCE
A stark picture of media-fed anti-Semitism -- expressed primarily in the framework of harsh and one-sided media reportage and criticism of Israel in its conflict with the Palestinians -- was presented by speakers this week at an international conference on "Anti-Semitism and Prejudice in the Contemporary Media," being held at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
The conference was organized by the university's Vidal Sassoon International Center for the Study of Anti-Semitism, marking the center's 20th anniversary. The conference brought together prominent researchers in the field from Israel and abroad.
Margaret Brearley, advisor on the Holocaust to the Archbishops' Council in England and a lecturer at the Jewish Cultural Center in London, noted the sharp rise in anti-Zionist sentiment in Britain, along with an increase in anti-American attitudes. She said that Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon is "routinely demonized" in much of the British press, adding that "no other leader of any country is similarly demonized."
By contrast, said Brearley, who is the chairperson of the National Council of British WIZO and British vice-president of Faith and Freedom, the International Christian-Jewish Association on the Middle East, Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat is described in much milder terms, often as an arch-victim, or as a tragically heroic figure.
Brearley cautioned that not all anti-Israel reporting and opinion should be labeled anti-Semitic, but one can certainly discern traditional anti-Jewish elements in what is written and said. Some of the language used in the British media to describe Israel and Israelis recalls that used in anti-Semitic propaganda in the former Soviet Union in the 1970s, said Brearley, including terming Israelis as "crypto-fascists" or "colonial occupiers."
Brearley presented a litany of terms used in the British media to describe Israeli anti-terrorist actions, referring to them as "executions" or "assassinations" carried out by "death squads" or in "killing fields," while Palestinian suicide bombings are sometimes portrayed sympathetically as "retaliation for Israeli aggression." This kind of terminology reached a vitriolic height last April, she said, when the Israeli incursion into Jenin was "repeatedly and over a long period" described in such terms as "genocide," an attempt at "ethnic cleansing" or as an example of "war crimes."
The British religious press largely mimics the attitudes of the secular press, said Brearley, reflecting the predominant pro-Palestinian sympathies of the establishment Church, she said.
A disturbing trend of "tolerance" of the use of anti-Semitic language in the German press was presented by another speaker, Dr. Gilad Margalit, a historian from Haifa University. In both granting coverage to avowed anti-Semites and in commentary sometimes equating Israeli anti-terror actions with those of the Nazis, the German media is breaking old taboos against Jew-hatred, he said.
In Sweden, old anti-Jewish attitudes have again come to the fore, especially with the outbreak of the Lebanon War in 1982 and again in the context of the current intifada, said Dr. Henrik Bachner of the Department of History of Lund University in Sweden. Israeli actions in the 1982 war and the current Israeli-Palestinian conflict are described as provocative, aggressive and expressing Jewish Old Testament rage and cruelty, as contrasted with the Christian spirit of tolerance and forgiveness, said Bachner.
The Jews have even been portrayed in the Swedish media as analogous to the Nazis, taking revenge for what happened to them in the Holocaust. This makes them legitimate "targets" and enables criticism of Israel to provide a context in which anti-Jewish attitudes can be openly expressed, he said.
In France, the current upsurge of anti-Semitic incidents was described by Dr. Simcha Epstein, a senior researcher at the Vidal Sassoon International Center for the Study of Anti-Semitism, as the latest in a series of anti-Semitic waves that have periodically swept over that country. In the current wave, as in the past, Jews have rallied to combat the phenomenon, he said, though this time there is a more pluralistic approach, with many different groups fighting the trend in a variety of ways. One theme uniting the Jewish reaction is to portray the latest surge of anti-Semitic acts as a threat not only to Jews but to everyone - a tactic that has not worked in the past and that, Dr. Epstein intimated, won't work this time either."
http://www.mefacts.com/cached.asp?x_id=11277
And, wait, don't you post articles from Al Jazeera? I am pretty sure you have.
"Is Al Jazeera anti-Semitic and anti-American?
With its 24/7 coverage of the Cairo protests garnering praise from media critics, many are calling on more U.S. cable systems to carry the Arabic news network Al Jazeera.
But is the Qatar-based network anti-Semitic and anti-American, as some - like Fox News host Bill O'Reilly - have claimed?
And should Al Jazeera - which is presently only available in a few U.S. markets - be offered nationwide?
...
The Arabic channel, not surprisingly, is aimed squarely at an Arab audience and prides itself on giving voice to a wide range of perspectives from throughout the region. The result? At times it airs the views of extremists, "sometimes without challenging them as much as they should," Nisbet says. "There are definitely some biases in that they are an Arabic channel for Arab audiences."
And yes, there is anti-Semitism, Nisbet adds. "Unfortunately in Arabic political discourse there is a great deal of anti-Semitism. The conversation there about Israel and American foreign policy is very different from our discourse in the U.S."
http://journalism.about.com/od/trends/a/Is-Al-Jazeera-Anti-Semitic-And-Anti-American.htm
Hmmmm. Ahh, so its ok that other sources have carried anti-Semitic articles and that you yourself have posted articles from an anti-Semitic site, but you are demanding that only I have to stop using RT as a source?
In your attempt to paint a very one side picture of the RT news site, (you linked to a "satire piece" that was in inexcusably bad taste, a German talking head that turned out to be a neo-nazi and was fired, and an article about illuminate allusions?), you have ignored the tons of good articles from the site, including those that hold their own horrific past up for examination. Overall, RT is a reasonably balanced news source and compares favorably to our own state funded sites, Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty.
Oh, and just for fun lets point out what Radio Free Europe really has been, from the Radio Propaganda article on Wikipedia:
Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty[edit]
Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty is a broadcaster funded by the United States Congress that provides news, information, and analysis to countries in Eastern Europe, Central Asia, and the Middle East "where the free flow of information is either banned by government authorities or not fully developed".[63] RFE/RL is supervised by the Broadcasting Board of Governors, alongside Voice of America.
Founded as an anti-Communist propaganda source during the Cold War, RFE/RL was headquartered in Munich, Germany, from 1949 to 1995. In 1995, the headquarters were moved to Prague in the Czech Republic, where operations have been significantly reduced since the end of the Cold War. In addition to the headquarters, the service maintains 20 local bureaus in countries throughout their broadcast region, including a corporate office in Washington, D.C. RFE/RL broadcasts in 28 languages to 21 countries[64] including Russia, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iraq.
RFE/RL was developed out of a belief that the Cold War would eventually be fought by political rather than military means.[65] American policymakers such as George Kennan and John Foster Dulles acknowledged that the Cold War was essentially a “war of ideas”.[66] The United States, acting through the Central Intelligence Agency, funded a long list of projects to counter the Communist appeal in Europe and the developing world.[67] The missions of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty were separate from Voice of America in the sense that VOA was meant to be the voice of America, reflecting American foreign policy and disseminating world news from an official American viewpoint, whereas RFE/RL has the mission of captivating people and stimulating non-cooperation in Communist countries.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_propaganda#Radio_Free_Europe.2FRadio_Liberty
Your double standards are obviously intact.
So, we both agree The Economist is anti-Semitic too? Right?
And all those other media sources too? That you ignored? Right?
*crickets*
Now you complain when articles are posted as evidence? It was important to post their text here otherwise I was afraid you would gloss over them. Seems you did that anyways.
Sticking your head in the sand, as it were, to salvage your argument?
That's like little kids putting their fingers in their ears and going "LAA LAA LAA I can't hear you". Ok, you won't read the articles.
Lets discuss a picture then.
That Anti-semitic cartoon of theirs from The Economist was simply UNBELIEVEABLY BAD. Right?
Showing Obama shackled, which I think is also racist, to a US Seal with a Star of David on it? Lets look at THAT again.
F*cking racists AND anti-semitic clowns at The Economist. GOOD LORD.
There, is that LESS WORDS for you? You know, the say A PICTURE IS WORTH A THOUSAND WORDS, and THAT is some picture, eh?
THIS is an incredibly antisemitic cartoon. Implying that Jewish people are preventing President Obama from working for world peace and nuclear non-proliferation. Its EQUATING Jewish people to the flag burning, angry looking mob of Iranian hardliners holding back that cleric.
Its also implying that Jewish people CONTROL congress. LOOK at that SEAL. Good Lord.
C'mon, say its racist and ant-semitic. You can do it.
I admit when I am wrong, and I apologize. Why can't you admit you are wrong now?
You apparently can't bring yourself to say that this cartoon from the Economist is anti-semitic.
"An article in The Economist examining the Iranian nuclear deal barely mentions Israel. So what was the magazine thinking when it published this cartoon to accompany the article?
The cartoon is clearly meant to imply that both U.S. President Obama and Iranian President Rohani are being constrained in their efforts to reach out to each other. In the case of Obama, the U.S. Congress is portrayed as the proverbial ball and chain.
But take a closer look. Two Stars of David appear, one in the outer rim and the other located directly over the eagle symbol.
Note that this is not an Israeli flag but a Jewish symbol. Is the cartoonist implying that Congress is under Jewish control?
Jewish control over governments, the media and the international financial system is a classic feature of anti-Semitism and the cartoon is, wittingly or unwittingly, promoting this trope.
This falls firmly under the working definitions of anti-Semitism from both the U.S. State Department and the EU, which specifically include:
Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective — such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions. "
http://honestreporting.com/shades-of-anti-semitism-in-the-economist-1/
WHY CAN'T YOU SIMPLY ADMIT THIS IS AN ANTI-SEMITIC CARTOON? Good grief.
Because it undercuts your argument that ONLY RT is an unreliable new source, but not The Economist? They BOTH have exhibited anti-semitism.
How incredibly sad.
There were other examples given by me of anti-semitism in the media, but you ignored all those.
So I picked ONE clear cut example, that didn't have too many words since you complained about the number and length of those other examples, that is OBVIOUSLY anti-Semitic -- just to see if you could simply admit it was.
To date, you have not.
LOOK at it. It's anti-semitic with the Star of David images in the US seal. We slam TRUMP when he pulls this crap with Star of David images and rightly call it anti-semitic too.
ADMIT THE ECONOMIST WAS ANTI-SEMITIC, or, simply expose yourself for being hypocritical with your selective outrage.
I have a strong hunch you will do the latter and continue to pretend only RT was wrong. Want to move on to the OTHER examples of anti-semitism in the western media that I gave? I would be more than willing to do that too.
It's obvious you will continue to avoid condemning this despicable cartoon.
German newspaper is accused of anti-Semitic propaganda over cartoon depicting Mark Zuckerberg as big-nosed octopus
Cartoon in influential German newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung
The German newspaper, Süddeutsche Zeitung, has been accused of anti-Semitism after it published a cartoon depicting Mark Zuckerberg as an octopus controlling the world.
The cartoon was published in the newspaper last Friday after the announcement that Facebook had purchased Whatsapp. Two versions were published, one with the caption ‘Krake Zuckerberg’, the other ‘Krake Facebook’ – Facebook Octopus and Zuckerberg Octopus.
In the drawing, the 29-year-old Facebook founder is portrayed with a hooked nose, fleshy lips and curly hair, features ascribed to Jewish people in Nazi cartoons.
Zuckerberg Octopus: The cartoon was published in Süddeutsche Zeitung newspaper last week and has led to accusations of anti-Semitism
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2567167/Cartoon-German-newspaper-depicting-Mark-Zuckerberg-octopus-taking-world-starkly-reminiscent-Nazi-anti-Semitic-propaganda.html#ixzz4EgkAU7kx
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
The cartoon was ‘starkly reminiscent’ of anti-Semitic Nazi era cartoons, Efraim Zuroff from the Simon Wiesenthal Centre told the Jerusalem Post.
‘f anyone has any doubts about the anti-Semitic dimension of the cartoon, we can point to Mark Zuckerberg’s very prominent nose, which is not the case in real life,’ said Mr Zuroff who added that he found the cartoon, 'Absolutely disgusting!'
The cartoon depicts Mr Zuckerberg, who was raised Jewish but now describes himself as an atheist, as an octopus grasping at computers around him. In one of his tentacles he holds the logo of Whatsapp, the instant messaging service his company recently purchased for $19billion.
Jews were commonly depicted as octopuses, spiders, vampires and devils in Nazi-era propaganda, such as this poster from 1938
‘The nefarious Jew/octopus was a caricature deployed by Nazis. That was used pretty much as a staple by the Nazis in terms of their hateful campaign against the Jews in the 1930s. [An] exaggerated Jewish nose removes any question if this was unconscious anti-Semitism,’ Rabbi Abraham Cooper, Associate Dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Centre told Algemeiner.
Jews were commonly depicted as octopuses, spiders, vampires and devils in Nazi-era propaganda, such as this poster from 1938
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2567167/Cartoon-German-newspaper-depicting-Mark-Zuckerberg-octopus-taking-world-starkly-reminiscent-Nazi-anti-Semitic-propaganda.html
More anti-semitism from the influential German newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung, hmmm? THAT paper seems to make a habit of it.
