posted March 31, 2008 02:15 PM            

The move, which raises the spectre of the order given to the England football team to give a Nazi salute in Berlin in 1938, immediately provoked a storm of protest.

The controversial clause has been inserted into athletes' contracts for the first time and forbids them from making any political comment about countries staging the Olympic Games.

Most other countries, including Australia, will not order their competitors to keep quiet but will urge them to concentrate on their sport rather than get embroiled in political arguments.

To date, only Britain, New Zealand and Belgium have banned their athletes from giving political opinions while competing at the Games.

From the moment British athletes, likely to include the Queen's granddaughter Zara Phillips and Paula Radcliffe, sign up they will be gagged from commenting on China's politics, human-rights abuses or illegal occupation of Tibet.

Prince Charles has already let it be known that he will not go to China, even if he is invited by Games organisers. The Prince is also a long-time supporter of the Dalai Lama, the exiled Tibetan leader.

Yesterday, the British Olympic Association (BOA) confirmed that any athlete who refuses to sign the agreements will not be allowed to travel to Beijing.

Should a competitor agree to the clause, then speak their mind about China, they will be put on the next plane home.

The clause, in section 4 of the contract, simply states: "(Athletes) are not to comment on any politically sensitive issues." It then refers competitors to Section 51 of the International Olympic Committee charter, which "provides for no kind of demonstration, or political, religious or racial propaganda in the Olympic sites, venues or other areas".

BOA chief executive Simon Clegg said: "There are all sorts of organisations who would like athletes to use the Olympic Games as a vehicle to publicise their causes. As a team we are ambassadors of the country and we have to conform to an appropriate code of conduct."

However, human rights campaigner Lord David Alton condemned the move as "making a mockery" of the right to free speech.

Australian Olympic Committee president John Coates said: "What we will be saying to the athletes is that it's best to concentrate on your competitions. But they're entitled to have their opinions and express them. They're free to speak."

posted March 31, 2008 08:05 PM            

If we had our head out of our a$$es we would do the same thing. Hell, why support ANY country with a freaking CASTE system? How much money goes towards the poor of those countries that calls some "special and better" vs those of us taking care of the unfortunate (yet we are called Imperialists)?

posted April 01, 2008 01:39 PM            

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1569251.stm

He has also expressed his desire to be known as 'Defender of Faith' rather than 'Defender of the Faith' as is the usual title given to the King of England and thus the head of the Church of England.

It's reported here, alongside a picture of him with the Dalai Lama:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4253003.stm

posted April 01, 2008 04:12 PM              

and yet ... sigh ... and yet I also feel somehow that he's gotton a bad rap.

posted April 02, 2008 09:30 AM            

Yeow - thats very bizarre. Head of church? Most Royal people want its people to look upon them as Gods. That is such a nightmare. Its NOMB (none of my business) but Why is the british people tolerating that non-sense?

posted April 03, 2008 07:25 AM            

And the gall of both Britain and America yapping about China's human rights record? I mean, come on! The balls on them - quite phenomenal.

posted April 03, 2008 10:32 AM            

I don't think the structure of the Church of England is a burning political issue for the average Briton. Or the presence of the Royal family. They are figureheads without real power and as such they serve their purpose.

And as such this is a clever piece of diplomacy. It saves the U.K causing offence to China, which is against its political and economic interests. That's probably why the gagging order has been put in place ~ at a guess. I don't expect to see anyone in any real position of authority say anything stridently critical about the situation in China and Tibet. Athletes will be expected to shut up and jump/run/swim/hop as and when just in case they get press coverage and cause embarrassment. This has probably more to do with protecting the 2012 Olympic games than views regarding Tibet or Human Right relating to the people of China in general.

That's how I read it, it's not anything to do with my personal feelings on the subject.