Which forced marriage do you have in mind, Alex? j On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 5:03 AM, Alex Gakuru <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Deep down here in Africa many NGOs champion against forced marriages. > But when forced marriages happen up there at ICANN who speaks against > the practice? > > On 7/6/12, Nuno Garcia <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > I have said this once: The Olympic Committee has a budget that is bigger > > than many nations' budgets. They can afford not to be for-profit. The > same > > goes for other organizations. > > > > And some statements are pure intellectual arrogance. > > > > Best, > > > > Nuno Garcia > > > > On 5 July 2012 23:16, Joly MacFie <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > > >> But you are not disputing their facts, I take it. > >> > >> j > >> > >> > >> On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 5:58 PM, Michael Carson > >> <[log in to unmask]>wrote: > >> > >>> Alain, > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> I agree. This op-ed is just that - the opinion of two individuals. > >>> > >>> Michael Carson > >>> > >>> YMCA of the USA > >>> > >>> ------------------------------ > >>> *From: *"Alain Berranger" <[log in to unmask]> > >>> *To: *[log in to unmask] > >>> *Sent: *Thursday, July 5, 2012 3:55:09 PM > >>> *Subject: *Re: NYTimes: International Olympic Committee - "elitist, > >>> domineering, and crassly commercial at its core" > >>> > >>> > >>> NPOC really welcomes national Olympic committees as Members because > >>> they > >>> are true notforprofit organizations... > >>> > >>> Alain > >>> > >>> On Thursday, July 5, 2012, Robin Gross wrote: > >>> > >>>> As a commercial organization that tried to join NCSG, very relevant… > >>>> > >>>> No Medal for the International Olympic Committee says the New York > >>>> Times….. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/05/opinion/no-medal-for-the-international-olympic-committee.html?_r=3&ref=opinion&pagewanted=print > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> ------------------------------ > >>>> July 4, 2012 > >>>> **Olympian Arrogance**** By JULES BOYKOFF and ALAN TOMLINSON**** > >>>> **** > >>>> > >>>> Brighton, England > >>>> > >>>> WHILE Europe roils in economic turmoil, London is preparing for a > >>>> lavish > >>>> jamboree of international good will: in a few weeks, the city will > host > >>>> the > >>>> 2012 Summer Olympics. > >>>> > >>>> But behind the spectacle of athletic prowess and global harmony, > >>>> brass-knuckle politics and brute economics reign. At this nexus sits > >>>> theInternational > >>>> Olympic Committee <http://www.olympic.org/>, which promotes the games > >>>> and decides where they will be held. Though the I.O.C. has been > >>>> periodically tarnished by scandal — usually involving the bribing and > >>>> illegitimate wooing of delegates — those embarrassments divert us from > >>>> a > >>>> deeper problem: the organization is elitist, domineering and crassly > >>>> commercial at its core. > >>>> > >>>> The I.O.C., which champions itself as a democratic “catalyst for > >>>> collaboration between all parties of the Olympic family,” is > >>>> nonetheless > >>>> run by a privileged sliver of the global 1 percent. This has always > >>>> been > >>>> the case: when Baron Pierre de Coubertin revived the Olympics in the > >>>> 1890s, > >>>> he assembled a hodgepodge of princes, barons, counts and lords to > >>>> coordinate the games. Eventually the I.O.C. opened its hallowed halls > >>>> to > >>>> wealthy business leaders and former Olympians. Not until 1981 were > >>>> women > >>>> allowed in. > >>>> > >>>> Even today, royalty make up a disproportionate share of the body; > among > >>>> the 105 I.O.C. > >>>> members< > http://www.olympic.org/content/the-ioc/the-ioc-institution1/ioc-members-list/ > > > >>>> are > >>>> the likes of Princess Nora of Liechtenstein, Crown Prince Frederik of > >>>> Denmark and Prince Nawaf Faisal Fahd Abdulaziz of Saudi Arabia. The > >>>> United > >>>> States has only three representatives, two of them former Olympic > >>>> athletes. > >>>> > >>>> Then there are the excessive demands that the I.O.C. makes on host > >>>> cities. For instance, the host cities have had to change their laws to > >>>> comply with the Olympic > >>>> Charter<http://www.olympic.org/Documents/olympic_charter_en.pdf>, > >>>> which states that “no kind of demonstration or political, religious or > >>>> racial propaganda is permitted in any Olympic sites, venues or other > >>>> areas.” When Vancouver, British Columbia, hosted the Winter Games in > >>>> 2010, > >>>> the city passed a bylaw that outlawed signs and banners that did not > >>>> “celebrate” the Olympics. Placards that criticized the Olympics were > >>>> forbidden, and the law even empowered Canadian authorities to remove > >>>> such > >>>> signs from private property. > >>>> > >>>> The I.O.C. also makes host cities police Olympics-related intellectual > >>>> property rights. So Parliament adopted the London Olympic Games and > >>>> Paralympic Games Act of > >>>> 2006<http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/12/contents>, > >>>> which defines as a trademark infringement the commercial use of words > >>>> like > >>>> “games,” “2012” and “London” in proximity. > >>>> > >>>> Such monomaniacal brand micromanagement points to another problem: the > >>>> I.O.C. has turned the Olympics into a commercial bonanza. In London, > >>>> more > >>>> than 250 miles of V.I.P. traffic lanes are reserved not just for > >>>> athletes > >>>> and I.O.C. luminaries but also for corporate sponsors. Even the > >>>> signature > >>>> torch relay has been commercialized: the I.O.C. and its corporate > >>>> partners > >>>> snapped up 10 percent of the torchbearer slots for I.O.C. stakeholders > >>>> and > >>>> members of the commercial sponsors’ information technology and > >>>> marketing > >>>> staffs. Michael R. Payne, a former marketing director for the > >>>> committee, > >>>> has called the Olympics “the world’s longest commercial.” > >>>> > >>>> Most worrisome, perhaps, is that the I.O.C. creates perverse > incentives > >>>> for security officials in host cities to overspend and to militarize > >>>> public > >>>> space. The I.O.C. tends to look kindly on bids that assure security, > >>>> and > >>>> host cities too often use the games as a once-in-a-lifetime > opportunity > >>>> to > >>>> stock police warehouses with the best weapons money can buy. > >>>> > >>>> Visitors to London, where the games are scheduled to run from July 27 > >>>> to > >>>> Aug. 12, would be forgiven for thinking they had dropped in on a > >>>> military > >>>> hardware convention. Helicopters, fighter jets and bomb-disposal units > >>>> will > >>>> be at the ready. About 13,500 British military personnel will be on > >>>> patrol > >>>> — 4,000 more than are currently serving in Afghanistan. Security > >>>> officials > >>>> have acquired Starstreak and Rapier surface-to-air missiles. Even the > >>>> Olympic mascots look like two-legged surveillance cameras. > >>>> > >>>> Let us be clear: the concern about ensuring a terror-free Olympics is > >>>> tragically warranted. In 1972, members of the Palestinian militant > >>>> group > >>>> Black September killed 11 Israeli athletes and coaches at the Olympics > >>>> in > >>>> Munich — after which the I.O.C. president notoriously insisted that > >>>> “the > >>>> games must go on” — and in 1996, a bomb at the Atlanta Olympics killed > >>>> a > >>>> spectator and injured more than 100 other people. Yet there is such a > >>>> thing > >>>> as excess — and surveillance and weaponry are not a panacea. > >>>> > >>>> Security measures can also be counterproductive: London residents who > >>>> learned that the Ministry of Defense was attaching missile launchers > to > >>>> the > >>>> roofs of their apartment buildings can’t be blamed for wondering if > >>>> they’ve > >>>> unwillingly become a prime target for terrorists. And, symbolically, > at > >>>> a > >>>> certain point it gets hard to square the image of the militarized > state > >>>> with the Olympic ideals of peace and understanding. > >>>> > >>>> What can be done? The I.O.C. has acknowledged that the escalating > scale > >>>> of the games — “gigantism” — is a real issue. Competitions drenched in > >>>> privilege, like the equestrian events, should be ditched (with > apologies > >>>> to > >>>> Ann Romney’s horse Rafalca, who will be competing in dressage in > >>>> London). > >>>> Pseudo-historical events like Greco-Roman wrestling, concocted in the > >>>> 19th > >>>> century, could also go. Events with high start-up costs could be > >>>> swapped > >>>> for those requiring fewer resources. Why not bring back tug-of-war (a > >>>> hotly > >>>> contested event in the early 20th century) and add more running > events, > >>>> like trail running and cross-country? > >>>> > >>>> Governance is another challenge. After the bribery scandal surrounding > >>>> the selection of Salt Lake City to host the 2002 Winter Olympics, and > >>>> under > >>>> pressure from Congress, the I.O.C. created an ethics commission to > >>>> monitor > >>>> the bid process — but it reports to the I.O.C.’s executive board, > which > >>>> still has the final say. > >>>> > >>>> Other measures worth considering are to streamline committee > membership > >>>> and to provide greater representation for the international sports > >>>> federations that administer athletic competitions — though either > >>>> approach > >>>> would continue to pose accountability problems. > >>>> > >>>> In these bleak economic times, the world could use a little athletic > >>>> transcendence. Sadly, the arrogance and aloofness of the organization > >>>> behind the spectacle are all too ordinary. > >>>> ** > >>>> Jules > >>>> Boykoff< > http://www.pacificu.edu/as/politics/faculty/jules-boykoff.cfm/>, > >>>> an associate professor of political science at Pacific University, is > >>>> writing a book on dissent and the Olympics. Alan > >>>> Tomlinson<http://alantomlinson.typepad.com/> is > >>>> a professor of leisure studies at the University of Brighton. > >>>> **** > >>>> ****** > >>>> ** > >>>> MORE IN OPINION (2 OF 19 ARTICLES) Op-Ed Columnist: Doughnuts > >>>> Defeating > >>>> Poverty< > http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/05/opinion/doughnuts-defeating-poverty.html?src=un&feedurl=http%3A%2F%2Fjson8.nytimes.com%2Fpages%2Fopinion%2Findex.jsonp > > > >>>> > >>>> Read More > >>>> »< > http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/05/opinion/doughnuts-defeating-poverty.html?src=un&feedurl=http%3A%2F%2Fjson8.nytimes.com%2Fpages%2Fopinion%2Findex.jsonp > > > >>>> Close > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Alain Berranger, B.Eng, MBA > >>> Member, Board of Directors, CECI, > >>> http://www.ceci.ca< > http://www.ceci.ca/en/about-ceci/team/board-of-directors/> > >>> Executive-in-residence, Schulich School of Business, > >>> www.schulich.yorku.ca > >>> Treasurer, Global Knowledge Partnership Foundation, > >>> www.gkpfoundation.org > >>> NA representative, Chasquinet Foundation, www.chasquinet.org > >>> Chair, NPOC, NCSG, ICANN, http://npoc.org/ > >>> O:+1 514 484 7824; M:+1 514 704 7824 > >>> Skype: alain.berranger > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> --------------------------------------------------------------- > >> Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast > >> WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com > >> http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com > >> VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org > >> -------------------------------------------------------------- > >> - > >> > > > -- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org -------------------------------------------------------------- -