This is interesting. FIFA, the international body overseeing (puke) soccer, has condemned Israel for airstrikes against suspected Palestinian rocket targets. What’s strange is, according to this site, FIFA’s never condemned any other country before – not any of the world’s numerous tyrants or anything. But they decided to condemn Israel.
Pretty dumb.
UPDATE: See comments for further detail. I should have known better. One demerit for me.
The story’s never as simple as it looks.
OW, you linked to Sportsbiz. He got the story from NRO. That ought to be enough to tell you that the story needs corroboration.
Here’s what FIFA has to say:
Oliver, you really shouldn’t rely on the NRO for anything but misinformation. Here is an article from Haaretz, which describes what FIFA is doing about the situation:
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/705240.html
When you read a Jewish newspaper’s account of the situation and NRO, you have to wonder where they get their facts and what they are trying to prove.
By the way, it is really your loss that you don’t like soccer.
Holy crap! FIFA covers their butt, and you guys line up and kiss it!
From the publication that dare not speak its name (see, Oliver! If you had the cojones to link to it, we all could have read this before the anti – Israeli lefties chimed in:
As usual, the “Shoot ‘em where they ain’t” left is shouting “Don’t look at the [anti - Israel] man behind the curtain.
You dropped the {soccer} ball on this one, Oliver.
And, surprise, surprise! The condemnation of Israel story has disappeared from the FIFA web site. Winston shoved it down the memory hole, no doubt…
And my comment is awaiting moderation.
Yes, OW, this is how so many people got to believing that Al Gore said he invented the internet; that John Kerry was a waffling coward (contrasted, of course, by Dubya’s resolute manliness); and that Iraq had ties to ‘al Qaeda’. Some lazy (or ideologically corrupted) reporter picks up a lie from a right-wing deception factory, and eventually lazy reporters everywhere are spreading it around. Of course, the vast majority of editorial boards are right-wing, as are newspaper owners, so this sort of lazy reporting (the kind that serves right-wing interests) doesn’t get culled, not even from ‘liberal’ media outlets (see Hugo Chávez).
Why do you think Media Matters is able to do such a fine job (and I don’t mean that sarcastically)? Why do you think an organization like F.A.I.R. does, also? Because so much of what you inadvertently did is being passed off as the routine.
Just for sh-ts and giggles, though, can you guess why NRO smeared FIFA? I think it revolves around the sentiment conveyed by this line:
FIFA stressed that it supported Palestinian and Israeli football equally.
GASP!! Treating those terror-loving savages as equal to Israelis?! What rabid anti-Semites they must be!
I can recall a similiar thing (well, maybe just a little related) happening a few years ago regarding Philadelphia Yearly Meeting (Quakers) and Ramallah Friends School. Ramallah Friends, which is attached to the local Quaker meetinghouse, had been damaged by rocket fire (I can’t remember if it was IDF or Palestinian terrorist, but I think it was an accident of IDF’s) and Philadelphia Yearly Meeting helped pay to have it rehabilitated. It caused this huge shitstorm among what’s usually a pretty amicable ecumenical community in Philadelphia.
As an Englishman and football supporter, I can honestly say: who the hell knows why FIFA says anything?
Interesting side note… if you specify an Israeli link (.co.il) instead of a .com link, you get completely different advertising. http://www.haaretz.co.il/hasen/spages/705240.html. Kind of obvious when I think of it, but I figured I’d pass it on.
Jerusalem Post (Apr 8):
I couldn’t find anything from FIFA criticizing the Palestinian attack which hit an Israeli soccer field. That is obviously the point.
Is linking to the Jerusalem Post an automatic flag for moderation?
Disappeared, Frank? What evidence do you have that there was ever anything on the FIFA website?
MSU again?
From the J-Post article linked by JWG:
It takes a pretty big stretch to turn that into a condemnation.
See, OW started off with a bit of erroneous information. But what did he do when he found out he was in error? He corrected himself.
What do the wingers do when their b.s. gets exposed? Pile on more b.s. Personally, I’m with Nimrod in not really caring what FIFA has to say. However, it is always interesting to turn on the light and watch all the winger cockroaches scurry (except the really stupid ones).
I love guys like Alex the fireman….so consistently stupid.
Shorter alex…
“It never happened, but if it DID happen, who cares anyway…”
Cracks me up every time….
I don’t have any evidence that it ever existed at all…
Just as I don’t have any evidence that you exist…
Did anybody read the NRO piece? Even if you didn’t read it, I certainly quoted enough of it, for you to figure out where the article was going…
This wasn’t about one stadium. This was about their failure to address any abuses of the game, until Israel bombed a soccer field…
To the people who are now denying that the FIFA ever said any such thing, are you prepared to say that the NRO author made it up?
Then why the conciliatory statement on FIFA’s part?
It happened, alright, and their silence at the outrages perpetrated by other governments is very real, too.
Yes, as stated above.
The story was about several things, but as you say, the event that seems to have sparked the story was the bombing of the soccer field and FIFA’s response.
I can find no source, independent of the NRO story, that says FIFA “condemened” the bombing. I can find an AP story that says FIFA asked for an explanation, which isn’t the same thing. However, I don’t have any reason to conclude that the writer “made it up.” That would be just as baseless as assuming that FIFA “disappeared” a story from its website that no one seems to have seen or quoted.
Obviously, to try to tell their side of a story that has the potential to become very emotionally-charged.
“It happened”? What happened? The “condemnation”? There’s no evidence of that other than the NRO story. The questions? Obviously. The “disappeared” news release? Only in your imagination.
You’re not curious why the FIFA didn’t ask for an explanation from the Palestinians for their bombing of an Israeli soccer field the day before?
Furthermore, the FIFA representative who requested the Israeli explanation said
I agree that this does not rise to a condemnation, but it certainly is not equitable to their non-response concerning the Palestinian attack.
See what I mean? No proof, just more b.s.
Just like when Oliver recently claimed that Libby exposed Bush for authorizing the Plame leak? Except that never happened. And Oliver never corrected the statement.
There’s no evidence of that other than the NRO story
If that’s not enough, then I guess that’s that.
There was no comdemnation, and there was no “memory holing” of the condemnation story.
Great.
Now, if we could only hold the Times to a similar standard: There’s no evidence of that other than the NY Times story (or substitute CNN, USA Today or Reuters or AFP, etc.)
I can’t wait.
BTW, Quaker (if there really is a Quaker) and Alex (if there really is an Alex) I’m no longer sure either of you exist.
Have either of you got your names in at least two public documents?
No?
Sure. I guess they should have sent a letter to the Palestinian ambassador too. If “Palestine” had any ambassadors.
FIFA is interested in promoting football. They asked for an explanation of why the Gaza soccer field was hit because they want people in Gaza to play soccer! Imagine!
Frank:
If there was a condemnation, if there was a story on the FIFA website, don’t you think someone besides one NRO writer might have noticed?
Go read the NRO story again, Frank.
Does the writer actually quote the “condemnation”? No.
Does he tell us where the condemnation appeared? No.
Does he quote anyone who heard or read the condemnation? No.
He just writes a shocking story that hits all the familiar points in the script, and asks us to take his word for it.
Jeezus H. Christ, what kind of nutjob do you need to be to believe that FIFA has it in for Israel and that we are now witnessing a “cover-up”? FIFA cares about world soccer. If something reduces the amount of it played, they get upset. They are going to help pay for repairs on a stadium. They have always had a soft spot for “underdog” countries which explains why they’ve promised 2010 World Cup will be in Africa. Just put this story to bed and realize that NRO is trying to incite controversy where none exists.
The kind of nutjob who has seen this very same scenario played out around the world in all kind of venues…
I suppose you’re now prepared to say that the whole NRO story was concocted?
Next you’ll say that the UN hasn’t issued nearly annual resolutions condemning Israel for their “zionism” while mentioning nothing aboutblowing up discos, weddings, buses, etc.?
Here’s the thing about the NRO piece: Did FIFA exist in the 1970s in a form that would have condemned the use of soccer fields for whatever?
Frank, FIFA is a soccer organization. They care about international soccer. Your inability to separate the UN from other international organizations is bizarre, but not unexpected. My recommendation is that you save your ammo for a more appropriate target.
There’s plenty more than that wrong with the NRO piece.
The writer complians that FIFA didn’t raise a fuss about Uday Hussein torturing the Iraqi soccer team. What the writer forgets to mention is when that information became known.
The writer says FIFA plans to “take action against Israel,” but he doesn’t quote any person or any document that actually says so.
The writer claims that the Afghan soccer coach witnessed Taliban executions during soccer games, but quotes an article that reports that soccer has “finally returned” to Afghanistan after the fall of the Taliban.
And Frank: FIFA is not part of the UN, or vice versa.
In 1863, some men met in the Mason’s arms in London to thrash out the rules for what the rest of the world calls football. They became the Football Association. the original rules stopped players from attaching gutta percha or nails to ones boots (football wars in medieval times allowed anything).
THIS IS THE WORLD’S MOST POPULAR SPORT. It’s fairly simple to play. American football is like ww1 trench warfare IMO (back a little, forward a little), and seems constantly to be stopping.
http://www.palestine-un.org/dir/emb.html
Doesn’t this argument imply they don’t care if people play in Kibbutz Karmiya?
Next you ll say that the UN hasn t issued nearly annual resolutions condemning Israel for their zionism while mentioning nothing aboutblowing up discos, weddings, buses, etc.?
Between 1955 and 1992, the UN issued 68 resolutions against Israel. How many have been issued against the Palestinians? NONE. Why? Because the Palestinians don’t have a NATION; they are an occupied people. The occupation is illegal, and the way it is handled is also illegal. At any rate, since the Israelis are the occupiers, they have certain responsibilities that they have been illegally ignoring.
If you want to see the UN issue resolutions against the Palestinians for the actions of some of their pissed-off and desperate people, then you should write your congressmen and ask them to demand that Israel end the occupation. Then you can demand that the U.S. help build a sovereign Palestinian state, as it helped build Israel. Once the Palestinians have their state, then the UN can issue resolutions against any violence they carry out against Israel.
Correction for message below: the Palestinians have a nation, but they do not have a state. Big difference.
zadura: Who said I was unable to “separate the UN from other international organizations”, and I don’t see why it would be “bizarre,” if the behaviors are identical.
So yes it is an appropriate target.
Once again, we have one of those lame liberal defenses: This isn’t really important, so just go along with us.
As if I would (need or want to) follow your recommendation. Why?
Here’s the difference between FIFA and the UN:
One organization involves kicking each others’ balls, and although they are an international organization, they really have little or nothing to do with changing international policy.
The other organization sponsors the World Cup.
Frank, it’s not worth noting all the logical fallacies that creep into your arguments, but it might be worth pointing out that you are “arguing by analogy.” It doesn’t help you. It gives the appearance of a lame argument, which you have. Just because FIFA has jurisdiction over many countries does not make it like the UN. Neither should it be branded with any of the UN’s faults nor praised for any successes.
FIFA has recognized and supported soccer in Israel since its inception in 1948, and Israel participated in World Cup preliminaries since 1949. If FIFA or any of its representatives ever “condemned” Israel for bombing an empty soccer field in Palistinian Territories, they sure didn’t make a very public demonstration of that fact. They simply set out to rebuild the field. I fail to see why you have a paranoid need to criticize FIFA. You don’t do anything for Jews, Israel or your own argument by trying to find a bogeyman in every international organization.
If the Palestinians don’t have a nation then how do they have a prime minister? How is it that they have just elected a terrorist organization commited to the destruction of Israel to rule (and thus, the Palestinian people are declaring that they are commited to the destruction of Israel)? Who are the Saudis paying all those millions in aid to?
So if a nation doesn’t exist the UN is barred from issuing a Resolution condemning the terroist actions of a particular group of people? The UN issued a Resolution declaring 2008 the Year of the Potato but they can’t condemn the Palestinian terrorists?
It might.
On the other hand, it might imply that the Israeli soccer field wasn’t destroyed. Or maybe that it wasn’t targeted (it was hit with a Kassam, after all). Or that the people at the Kibbutz can still play.
Or it might mean that FIFA is a bunch of pro-Palestinian, Jew-hating, terrorist-supporting, Nazi-loving fascists.
Which seems more likely to you?
I guess the Israel Football Assocatioan hates Isreal too:
“Israel Football Association Chairman Izhak Iche Menahem said on Saturday that media reports which suggested that FIFA was about to place sanctions on Israel in response to last week`s bombardment by Israeli artillery of Gaza`s main stadium were “completely unfounded” …
It should be noted that ties between FIFA and the IFA are
excellent as are relations between senior officials from both bodies.
Indeed, the IFA has very close and continual dealings on a close personal level with FIFA President Sepp Blatter, General Secretary Urs Linsi and with Champagne.
Menahem, emphasised that Champagne is a true friend of Israeli Football, his wife is Jewish and he always tries to help the IFA.
Indeed, Champagne was personally involved in the decision in 2004 to allow Israeli national teams and clubs return to host matches on home soil.
“Israeli football has not forgotten and will never forget the support
of Jerome Champagne and of FIFA`s officials. The IFA and FIFA will continue to maintain the spirit of sport and will continue to work for good coexistence and peace between the nations in the region,” Menahem said.
The IFA wishes to emphasise that it always views positively FIFA`s requests to assist the Palestinians and has often intervened with the Israeli authorities to help arrange travel permits for Palestinian national team players to travel to international matches.
The IFA also tries to assist in other matters concerning Palestinian sports and their sports officials.”
http://www.israel-football.org.il/articles/index.asp?story=853
If, indeed, the IFA claims that the “media reports which suggested that FIFA was about to place sanctions on Israel… ‘completely unfounded’ , I think that means the reports were unfounded, in their opinion; not that they hate Israel.
But that’s just me.
zadura: Give it up already. I have neither a “paranoid need to criticize FIFA,” nor any other kind of “need” to criticize FIFA. {Aside: exactly how is a need “paranoid”? Discuss.}
If A does B to C, and D does B to C, then A’s behavior is similar to D’s, irrespective of the types of organizations they are.
When Major League Baseball discriminated against blacks, were they doing something different from the Ivy League Schools were doing, when they discriminated against blacks?
Or was it different because one is an informal organization of educational institutions, and the other a bunch of colleges?
Incidentally, doesn’t the Jerusalem Post count as a news outlet, or are they making the story up, too?
And, by the way, the UN is sensationally anti – Israel, so if it seems that FIFA is, too, it’s a perfectly legitimate comparison.
Why are you pretending that I’m finding anti – Israel organizations all over the landscape, when all I’m saying is that FIFA applied a double standard to Israel, and so has the UN.
Both statements are true. It takes no particular expertise in logic to say, “A is true, and so is B.”
And they did take action. Only it wasn’t “against” anybody. They offered to rebuild the soccer field.
Even you don’t believe that.
This thread is becoming more and more fantastic (in its conventional meaning) by the minute.
There is no way on God’s green earth that that statement could be interpreted to mean that they were considering a positive action.
Frank, you are simply pathologically incapable of arguing without resorting to analogy. How else can explain you going from arguing about whether FIFA is anti-semitic to trying to untangle baseball and the Ivy League. There is a false equivalence. Just because your front yard is flat doesn’t mean the earth is flat and FIFA =! UN.
If you don’t like the fact that FIFA is paying to replace a field in Palestinian Territories, fine. If you don’t like the fact that they have long, long supported Israel, fine. If you want to call them anti-semitic, fine. Argue the merits of each of these points if you haven’t given up on them, but please do not continue to equate them either in means or ends with the UN.
zadura: Have you got relatives working at the UN or something?
If it’s really upsetting you when I say the UN is full of anti – semites; and it is, I won’t say anything about the maaahvelous UN.
Durn, some people have some strange hangups, but UNaphilia, that’s a new one on me.
pathologically incapable of arguing without resorting to analogy.
First of all, using analogies is a perfectly acceptable means to either make a point or to teach. Why you would use a totally inappropriate adverb like “patholological” to describe their use is totally beyond me.
Do you always feel the need, like some Freudianesque Norm Crosby, to misuse psychological terms?
Oh, no! I’ve gone and used another analogy!
The results speak for themselves. What action did they take?
Actually, I’m glad the USA doesn’t have a toe-hold on Association Football, because then it would probably become shit. Budweiser who, along with Coke and McDonalds, do a lot of sponsorship in this sport even make joke adverts about it (You do the football, we”ll do the sponsorship).
I do pity the fact that you may have never seen the true on-field artistry of the Brazilians, or Beckham, Rooney, Pele, Zidane, Thierry Henry, van Nistleroy, and etc. A long list of great players and teams and games. I support England (where I live), then Eire (my parents’ country) then the other three home nations. England won the World Cup in 1966, the rest never have. I don’t just like a sport because we are the best in the world at it; a criticism levied against the most popular US sports.