Over the last couple of days there have been a number of fairly high profile criticisms of China in relation to the Bejing Olympics - mostly due to China's human rights abuses, and effectively supporting Sudan over Darfur:

Spielberg steps down as artistic adviser

Olympics Gag leads to review

Badminton Player Richard Vaughn speaks out

Could we be about to see a boycott by some athletes of the Olympics do you think?

Yes China is not high on the list of countries observing the basic human rights but which superpower is? this Spielberg's consciousness is a joke. I never liked his movies and now I understand why. Another case of seeing the straw in the neighbours eye while not seeing the beam in his own. Hypocrits I say.

I'm behind China with this..
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/7244133.stm
Wouldn't be surprised if Spielberg had been nudged here... i think China is right when they talk about ulterior motives...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I always thought that the Olympic Games was meant to disregard political issues and just be purely about sport. I really dislike it when sport clashes with politics and I hate it even more when celebrities get into politics but people always insist on crossing those lines :rolleyes:

I sincerely hope that there will not be a huge boycott. I am a HUGE fan of the Olympic Games (if they were in Beijing in 2004 and Athens this year, I would have gone) and I don't understand who benefits from the boycott but I know who the boycott will affect - the athletes, the fans, TV companies, tourism, the sponsors (Chinese sponsors and International sponsors), local businesses etc. It would just be a waste of money. Fair enough, Beijing isn't the best location in the world but the IOC made their decision in 2001 and that's their choice.

On the very, very off-chance, if GBR were to boycott the Games, then I suppose we should cut off all trade links with China, otherwise we'd be huge hypocrites and we can't afford to do that.

Has it really only just come to peopel's attention that China is an inapproprite venue? :lmaao:

I've been against them having it from the start. Countries with terribel human rights records should not be given such priviledges as to hold such prestigious world events. And the fact that this has been allowed to happen is sure to spark controversy, bring it on I say! :clap:

Sure other countries have human rights issues but they are not holding the Olympics this time are they so we have to focus on what is happening rather than draw on ifs and buts. I do agree though that there is often hypocrisy when it comes to pointing out one countrie's failings against another and Amercia is often the hypocrit involved, but staying focused on actualities I don't think it is right.

It's also naive and unrealistic to say that politcs and sport should stay seperate. Politics in influences everything, it's inescapable and it's life. It's there for a reason and the emergence of a major political issue in supposed non political events serves an essential, useful purpose i.e. making us look outisde of the smaller picture to the wider perspective and creating debate, making change. Nothing operates in isolation, and I do hope that some athletes and other s involved will show some substance and guts and speak out rather than pretend eveything is fine, helping others brush important issues under the carpet. I'm not saying China is totally evil, corrupt or the worst ever offender in the world but I'm sick of people pandering to large countries, overlooking their crimes and giving them waht they want. :angry:

Cut of trade links with China? I wish they bloody well would cos I am sick of everythign I buy being made there :lol: Cheap platic crap that falls to bits in seconds,.circuitry that a child of five could assemble ... and proably has sadly :rolleyes:

I agree with you SB - I don't think sport and politics should stay separate. What's the famous feminist line "the personal is political"? Everything is about politics in the end (although i'm a political scientist so i would say that - keeps me in a job ;) ) and if sports people or celebrities want to get involved or campaign about political issues then fair play to them.

However, I think there's a hideous hypocrisy with people like Spielberg - willing to speak out (now - after how long acting as artistic director????) about China's human rights abuses, but remaining remarkably quiet about his own country's abuses in Guantanamo Bay, and the use of "water-boarding "(or water torture as it's better known). :shrug:

But the fact that the Olympics wil go ahead in Bejing is really the fault of the IOC - when China got awarded the Olympics 8 years ago or whatever, they were told that they had to sort out their human rights record. The IOC should have had a back-up country ready to take over organising the games, and if after a ocuple of years it became clear that the Chinese authorities were doing nothing to clean up their act - the IOC should have taken the games away from them.

Amnesty - China and Human Rights

Wowo someone agrees with me! :yikes: :lol:

The personal is the political was exactly what I was thinking :ok:

Sure I can see the potential hypocrisy of Speilberg, although I'd have to read all the stuff to make a proper judgement. As I said Amercia is often the country who points the finger and ignores their own less than perfect record. Had the Olym[pics goen to the USA I think there would be a lot of protest.

If China hasn't sorted out his human rights adn that was a condition of it gettign the Olympics, then is should not get it end of. I agree the IOC are at huge fault, and stupid becuase they failed to ensure that they coudl actualle IMPOSE that condition. Unbelievable really. :rolleyes:

I'll read your article now ...

Excellent article. I don't think anyone can sit there and ignore the politics of this.

On Freedom of Speech and Expresssion alone, China are extremely repressive, actively blocking this via crackdown on writers, journalists, Internet users and human rights defenders/lawyers. Closing newspapers, blocking/closing websites; detainment of journalists for reporting on sensitive issues; foreign news agencies needing approval from Chinese official agency to publish news. Detainment without charge, harrassment of and jailing of journalists/human rights defenders. New law restricts legal representation of groups of victims and participation in collective petitions. A human rights lawyer had his practice shut down and was jailed for 5 years! Spiritual and religious groups are repressed if their religion is not 'sactioned' by the state, being ill-treated, tortured in detention, jailed and sentenced to death or executed. This seems pretty extreme to me, and akin to what has happened in totalitarian states liek Germany and Russia in the 20th Century - these countries were heavily criticised so to ignore China si total hypocrisy. The disturbing thing is that rather than improve on this as pledged, it seems that this has intensified and new regulations restricting basic rights have been allowed. It is 100% clear that China is NOT in active co-operation with the UN on human rights. For example, continuing to export arms to countries where they were likely to be used for serious human rights abuses, including Sudan and Myanmar.

I don't think there should be a boycott - as has been mentioned they won't do the same for trade/business links so why should only athletes (who train their whole life for this event) suffer.

The mistake was the IOC's for ever awarding China the Olympics in the first place - non democratic countries with such a poor record on basic human rights should simply not be allowed to host the games.

I agree that it is the IOC's fault, I also agree that it is dubious not to have trade sanctions with such countries. The fact that it is often okay to have links for ecomonimc reasons disgusts me also. But I don't think it should be ignored for those reasons - throw them into the debate as well - because it's like saying we can't fix that until we fix that, and we end up fixing nothing if you know what I mean. If the althletes feel that it is wrong they suffer and trade doesn't then they need to speak up IMO.

I'm not saying you said it, but often competitive sportspersons are portrayed as somehow being outside poltics and also victims of it. I don't agree with that, I think ti is far too soft an apprach because we are all in the same boat, and all victims to an extent . But also participation in sports today is not simple a case fo althletes just turning up for the love of sport and going home back to their day job, like we might. They are professionals, they earn an awful lot of money and status through their participaton, because of politics determining that - capitalism allows sponsorship, public taxes pay for some aspects of sport. They are basically working in a political world like all of us (and generally gaining more than us) and in the same way some of us have to take a stand in work and life, so do they. People go on strike to avoid themselves and others being sh*t on, or leave a job because of the politcal and moral implications, and athletes should NOT be in a diffeterent position. If we allow them to be then we elevate their importance above and beyond that of others and that si wrong to me.

Human rights are important but they are not the panacea! There are many other ways to harm masses of people within the HR declarations. Didn't we go to Iraq to save the Iraqis rights?

As some have said above, politics should stay out of sport...otherwise no country should really be granted the Olympics....except Malta maybe!

no - we went to Iraq because they had weapons of mass destruction that could be launched in 45 minutes :whistle:

I'm not even sure it's worth saying that IOC were wrong to award China the Olympics saying that they had to clean up their human rights record, considering what a corrupt organisation the IOC have been over the years - remember the Salt Lake City Games fiasco?

The other thing I don't like is how much money is needed to run an Olympic games now - ensuring that only the very biggest cities can bid for it, look how much it's costing London.

Yes good points.

I agree, and I live near London. What pisses me off is that I have had my council tax increased to pay for it, yet I won't see any of the benefits of the East side - like easy access to the Olympics if I wanted to go, and more importantly the huge rises in property prices that area is seeing compared to my area. I won't get any investment in my community either. I'll get extra traffic from the airport though :rolleyes:

I also find it quite crap that London won the bid, why not let a town that really needs it have it to create jobs and wealth in the North rather than bringing more peope into London to do it? :shrug:

I actually found it bizarre that Manchester didn't put in a bid tbh. Considering they already have all the facilities there because they hosted the Commonwealth Games. :shrug: I find it bizarre that the National Cycling Centre is in Manchester - which has one of the best velodromes in the world, where the British team are all based - yet for the 2012 Olympics they're going to build another one :shrug:

Give it to Malta then -- I suppose there is room for plenty of watersports :D

I respect your opinion Tenez, but Britain, the next host, hardly has a human rights record like Chinas. They still have the death penalty for minor crimes, force abortion on women, treat women as second class citizens economically, as well as their rural migrants who don't even get health care and education - in fact they have closed down schools in Beijing hoping to reduce the number of rural migrants. Then there is torture and abuse of practically anyone who doesn't do as the state says , etc. etc. I wouldn't want to live there I tell you. Nor visit really. I see there are plenty of countries doing wrogn also, but I also see plenty who act a damned sight more civilised in respecting human rights. :ok:

Totally agree :ok:

I remember a while back I think ti was a Birmingham bid? They were gonna host the waterpsorts at Holme Pierrepont (excuse me fi I spelt ti wrong, I can never remember!) in Nottingham. So there are plenty fo places around the country they could use. In fact as we are so small I don't see why they can't put things in different cities. Unless they have in which case I'm talkign crap.

Here's the list of venues for the 2012 olympics:

http://www.london2012.com/sports/a-z-direc...-and-venues.php

It appears that the football will be based all over the country and I notice that Weymouth is one of the venues - i assume for sailing. :unsure:

bit rich calling it the London Olympics isn't it :rolleyes:

I would not try to defend China policies but we have to see Chinese issues from their perspective and not ours. In the UK, prisons are full over there they are 1.2 Billion people. The price of life is simply not the same. Sadly certainly but it is a question of scale, numbers. They are dealing with different ones than we. For instance road accidents over there are apparently extremely frequent and people are used to it, they don't treat them with the same drama as we do. China's main issue is to keep their billion people at peace with each other. That is the real danger cause a civil war woudl be catastrophic. They had it durig the red revolution and they were only half what they are now, so if it needs execution of a small number, that is something they are prepared to do. It is a phase in the formation and transformation of a country. Our European countries went through it as well with kings and tsars and other dictators, but I think all in all comapred with let's say 20 years ago, China is moving in the right direction.

:D

I'm not sure it is though :shrug:

I do respect that ti has it's own unique problems, and that it is undergoing transformation but at what cost? I do look at it and see the same thing perhaps happening as it did in other countires who had revolutions. The Soviet Union was an agricultural ecomony dragged kcickign and screamgin into the 20th Century by Stalin. He did the same thing - massive industrialisation and expensive human and envirnomental costs. We are older and wiser as a people now and really have to try and take a stand against this sort of thing, as much of it there is no excuse for. But that aside, on a more global picture, we have fianlly woken up to global warming and environmental damage - and the cost of this push for economic spremecy is hug eon the planet. China si hardly a saint in thsi area. I saw a documentary on Linfen and was absolutley horrified. Tis covered in smog at noon!

In defence fo China I absolutely blame the capitism of the West for these forced pushes for industrial and economic development as countries like Russia and China feel forced to catch up. it's a shame so much comes down to the economy. :( There must be a way fo workign something out though because it's simply not right .

Manchester did bid for previous games but never really got anywhere - I think there was an unofficial suggestion that from the IOC that London had to be the bidder.

:unsure: Any idea why? Is it just 'cos it being the capital city?

Ok - SB but shouldn't we try to look at our own deeds before blaming other countries for today's problems. The UK and France were probably the first industrialised countries and global warming is essentially due to the Western world who got his standard of living thanks to it. Now that we have this quality of life, it is difficult to prevent other nations like China to develop. Besides, most of the Oil ressources are still in the hands of the westerners and we made sure it stayed that way recently, didn't we? SO blaming China for the problems of this world, is for me of the same order than people blaming smoking as the evil of this world while frankly driving, drinking, travelling, snorting, gambling, overeating, overworking, underworking etc......are in fact worse if not much worse. But suddenly because some majority managed to get rid of the smoking addiction, everybody should do the same and all other vices are acceptable because they are still addicted to it.

In my view China deserves the Olympics at least as much as any super power like Russia or USA. Spielberg is a clown whose country has currently no ethical lessons to teach China. Hopefully things are changing there.

China also monitors access to the internet and blocks alot of sites,
In terms of abusing Human Rights its ridiculous there.

*sigh* the more things change the more they stay the same. (Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the US boycott the 1980 Olympics in Moscow, and the USSR boycotted them the next time-in the US in '84?)

Hey Tenez, I agree and I'm not blaming China entirely for that. I think as I said that it's is very sad when so much comes down to economic power these days and that of course drives these countries to do what they do. I still however think we have to learn from past mistakes and try and do things better, trouble is the West won't help subsidise things cos they are equally greedy like the US is. And I agree about the oil, I think that is wrong. Sorry If I sound hypocrtical - I'm not defending the West as Saints, but I am very proud of the human rights in my country compared to that in some others. And I really feel that in this day and age we ought to all try much harder in that respect.

:ok: 100% agree. Several countries have been messed up by USA's interference in them - watch them do the same to Cuba now - and that mug Spielberg should stick to making films.

As for the human rights issues, I don't mean to defend the Chinese system, but I feel some people should actually go to China before they start slating the country, as opposed to reading stuff about it. The Chinese are completely different to the West in almost every way, and their system might seem barbaric to culturally opposite people, but it does work - look at their economic success for a start. Moreover, as sad as all this stuff is, people watch sport to get away from this kind of thing, not as yet another platform to hear boring political issues. Like everyone else said, the IOC made their decision and now they should put up or shut up.

Far from me this idea SB :hug: .When I say we should look at the beam in our eye first, I mean it, because we do have one. We can pick the human rights as one criteria but it is after all a "western" criteria but there are so many others twisted ways to harm the world around us while still being "Human rights clean" (if there was such expression).

Sorry to go back to the Iraq war but again it is a perfect and recent case of a sad event non sanctioned by the UN but some legal twisted pundits here have made it Legal for our good conscious. So we can say to the Chinese, our Iraq war is legal, your handling of Darfur isn't! 100 000s of innocent deaths later we can still call it a Legal war but more and more details have surfaced about the dubious intelligence that justified it in the first place.

I know I should stay out of those debates cause when we look at the world without tinted glasses, frankly no one can throw the first stone. :shrug:

Politics is NEVER boring Wise :D Well I have to say that cos I have a BSc in it :lol:

I do apprecaite you sentiments, but I don't think we can just ignore the political side. And I certainly don't think ecomonomic success, or global success fo any kind, justifies the violation fo human rights. That to me is very Machiavellian, as in the end justifies the means, and means that we can also say that it was Ok for Stalin and Hitler and any other totalitarina leader to do what they did becuase it bought ecomonomic and political success.

I don't mean to insult the Chinese as people btw, I feel sorry for many of them. :( And there are many positive things we could learn in the West frorm their attitudes of course. But I simply cannot defend the human right srecord. I don't defend the USA's actions in most things either - it does as you say have a habit of screwing up countries it gets involved in and no way am I defending them. And yes, I was shocked to hear about Castro and I am sure that the US will screw that up as well. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

You are very Wise tenez and I agree. I personally cannot claim to see everything objectively like anyone else. And I do agree that those with the most force generally make the laws and that these can be twisted to suit the purpose - we can defend our own poor actions with a law and make another that condemns another person, group or country's actions. Very hy[pocritcal and it make sme sick. And I am nto religious but I do liek that quote form the Bible which you imply "let he who is without sin cast the first stone" and yet as you say it is rare to be without sin! In which case all I have left to cling to is the hope that we can try and apply some compartive morals and common sense to proceedings, but of course that is so easy to bring down and never quite works either! But I must try, please forgive my failings :blush: :D

Btw earlier you made a post and I forgot to address this - you mentioned banning smoking and making it 'evil' compared to other substances, gambling etc. I totally agree on that :ok: Especialyl as I smoke and will tno do so in places or aroudn those that dislike it, but I don't think ti si too much to ask for consenting adults that wish to inhale smoke to have a place to do it. Especially as it is OK to get drunk and beat people up in public places :rolleyes: Oh and gamble all yoru money away and end up in debt leavign your family in poverty! All that law has achieved is more pubs going tou fo business and more folks stayign in to smoke and drink liek me and my friends. Oh and more peopel actually taking drugs outisde pubs, because it no longer looks odd standing outside for ages so why not have a marajuana joint? :rolleyes:

I think this is one of the things that the Chinese authorities are annoyed about - that it's the Americans and Brits who are criticising them. The same countries who have pretty much ignored the genocide in darfur and it's taken "celebrities" to bring it to the attention of the media and the public as a whole; who illegally invaded a country based on completely false pretences; who happily support the detaining of prisoners with no charges bought against them in Guantanamo bay; who allow prisoners to be flown to countries to be tortured.

If you go back to the Amnesty link that i posted earlier on China and click on America or the UK, you'll see we have a list as long as China's. we are certainly not whiter than white, which makes us slightly hypocritical in criticising the Chinese. :shrug:

I think we need to stand up and criticise human rights abuses the world over, and not simply pick on China or Burma or anywhere else "non-western."

As for the games, i said before that if the IOC were worried about human rights abuses they should never have awarded the games to China. They did so they have to live with the consequences. What i will say is that if the athletes wish to say something about the human rights abuses, i certainly don't feel that they should be stopped - i just wish some of them would speak out about our own behaviour as well :unsure:

:giggle: We'll have to disagree on that first sentence SB. ;)

Just to confirm, I wasn't trying to justify or condone the Chinese system. It is, however, very easy for people who've lived in England (or another developped country) all their life to get all aghast at what they read and hear about China, but it's really important to remember just how broad cultures can be. Anyway, this is in the 'Other Sports' section so I'm gonna steer as far clear of politics as I can, but to address your point about ignoring this situation, I agree - we shouldn't do that. However, if the Olympics gets boycotted, who loses? Sure, it'll screw the Chinese economy up - leading to more of these human rights abuses in an an attempt to resurrect the economy. The only losers with this idea are the Chinese people, who I think should be allowed their month of glory in what is after all a sporting occasion. So I'd say that now the issue has been raised and everyone is aware of it, hopefully people can just shut up about it, and some concrete action can be taken after it's finished, as opposed to useless ideas which will not help anyone.

Yeah I do take your point. I have lived in what is considered a developed country all my life, I'm glad of that , and consider myself very lucky indeed, and apologise if I've not considered certain things because of my culture. It is useful to think broader on this for me so I appreciate you and other's points on this. I am as a I am, partly because of my upbringing, partly because of genetics, and becuase of my experience and also my personality but my culture does of course play a big part, although I do count myself more individual than many. I guess I favour culture that is more promoting indivualtity than uniformity, which is a big politcial conflict for me as I am very much a fan of aspects of Communism, but I'm much more a Leon Trotsky fan than anyone else. :lol: Anyway I can appreciate that would give me a certain view on this, I do hope however that I have not come accross as completely blinded hypocrtical Wetsern materialist pro America ! :pray: That is really not me.

And now you make me feel guilty (not many people do !) with the stuff about taking away the Olymics from China for the peope there, their moment of glory. It's not them I have issue with (although if they support the oppressive aspects of their government then I simply cannot support them in that) it's the system of oppression. I just want that bought out and discussed, and awareness raised because lot of folks do not know or apprecaite how bad some things are even here. On the one hand you are right that we gain nothing if we boycott, on the other though what will we achieve if we simply say nothing and let such places have their moment? I fear that China has used this as an opportunity for promting themselves falsely as a tolerant and open nation. I am sure a lot of folks will see the spledour and be fooled. And I don't want them to be. I don't want th epeople to lose out either, but something has to give.

I knwo cock ups are thr IOC's fault, but it is also pretty lousy fo China to be given this chance and STILL blow it by NOT complying with ehat they agreed too. Pretty much a sbad as the USA really in that respect.

Yes SB. I don't smoke but sympathise so much with people who do. Some people try to make smokers feel guilty and would like to make us believe that tobacco leaves stink more than their diesel car ( I have a diesel car :( ) !

Anyhow thanks for the compliment but can't take it. As said I do too have a beam in my eye. I can't quite see it though. ;)

Why should people have to go to a country in order to start 'slating the country'?
Must i visit Zimbabwe in order to declare Mugabe as a miscreant of the first order? and i'm unlikely ever to visit 1930's Germany, so am i to remain silent on fascism and the holocaust too?
If you mean that first hand experience offers a unique form of verification, that second hand accounts don't, well yes up to a point, but the casual or even informed observer can't be sure of the full picture either, it takes many accounts and sources to build up a picture place or event.

The fact is politics and sport are inextricably linked, the Chinese authorities themselves will use the Olympics to symbolically demonstrate to the world China's well being as well as showcasing their economy, while simultaneously drawing attention away from their repressive nature.
In 1936 Hitler and Germany gained significant kudos from staging the olympics when there were already many misgivings around the world about Nazi Germany. I think we're in danger of giving China the same propaganda boost that the nazis enjoyed in 1936.
Jesse Owens victories in 1936 cannot be used in defence of participating in the Olympics either- Rather than challenging Nazi racism, the triumphs of Owens and other black athletes let the Germans hide it. Great lengths were taken by Hitler to make sure the German press did not castigate black Americans-in other words a façade that gave the impression Germany was something it was not-a fascist regime.
Nominally China is a Communist republic, but it is also a fascist one.

Athletes, politicians and the rest of us are moral agents too, if you decide to turn the other way, then you still make a choice-there's no escape.
As for the sainted members of the IOC well they will have to live with their moral decision too.

Great post :ok:

Your second paragraph about the way Nazi Germany used the Olympics is hitting the nail right on the head, and is exactly what I was getting at above when I said I feared "China has used this as an opportunity for promoting themselves falsely as a tolerant and open nation. I am sure a lot of folks will see the splendour and be fooled." I deliiberately did not make reference to the 1936 Olympics because I wondered if anyone else might actually raise that point. And sure those Olympics did give Hitler much Kudos indeed, and I'm sure that China will ensure that they get the same. In fact I wonder if that was their main motive for putting this bid in. I'm sure all countries have a selfish motive as well, including Britain for 2012, but a country with a negative world image has so much more to gain from the hype and will certainly be working 24/7 to ensure that nothing ruins the party and that the propaganda machine is in full flow.

IOC backs China human rights push

The Beijing Olympics will help to improve the human rights situation in China, says a senior International Olympic Committee (IOC) official.
Francois Carrard, a former IOC director general, says the intense spotlight of this summer's games will force China's government to enhance its reputation.

"If the Games were not awarded to China the (human rights) situation would not have progressed," he told BBC Sport.

"This is a contribution to progress, an accelerating factor."

China's human rights record has been under scrutiny ever since Beijing was awarded the Olympics in 2001, and the IOC pledged to monitor the situation.

Campaigners say China has not fulfilled its promise to make improvements in the build-up to the Games, but the Chinese government flatly denies the accusation.

Speaking to BBC sports editor Mihir Bose, Carrard - the IOC's legal advisor - admitted it might not be possible to identify any advances in the immediate future but maintained his optimism that the benefits would be felt in the long-term future.

"The monitoring has gone on ever since (Beijing was awarded the Games)," said Carrard. "Human rights is an overwhelming concern for all IOC members.

"The issue of human rights is not satisfactory in many countries around the world today, not only in China.

"But I'm convinced that when we look at this with the perspective of history we will see that the Olympic Games will have been an opportunity for considerable progress.

"Whether we can judge this now, just before the Games, after the Games or well after the Games remains to be seen."

Carrard urged observers to be patient in looking for improvements and pointed out that China, a country with the world's largest population, is somewhat unique.

"One must never forget that China has a time-frame which is totally difference from the rest of the world and progress can not always be measured by the same time standard," he said.

"We want immediate progress, we want things to happen within the next six months or a year but China has another pace."

The IOC always felt it could not keep the Games away from the world's most populated country, but opposition has intensified in recent months.

Earlier this month, film director Steven Spielberg withdrew as an artistic advisor to the event, accusing China of not doing enough to pressure Sudan to end the "continuing human suffering" in the troubled western Darfur region.

Meanwhile, a coalition of international athletes has been formed under the name Team Darfur and is campaigning heavily in the lead-up to the Games.

But the fact that there is debate about China's human rights record is seen by the IOC as vindication of their decision to awarded Beijing the Games, according to Bose.

"That is not a concern to me," says Carrard. "These voices are raised by people who have another agenda and other concerns which I fully respect. But I still feel they are wrong.

"I wouldn't be sitting here talking to you if China had not been awarded the Games - there is interest from the media and people concerned by what are very important issues.

"I respect what Mr Spielberg says but, respectfully, I totally disagree with him."