My Photo
Mobilise this Blog





New Zealand Conservative


AmCam News Tips

  • Have you got mobile camera pix of breaking news, or a first-hand account you've written?
    email Investigate now on publicity [at] and we'll get you online
Blog powered by Typepad

« Trap for young players | Main | The biggest missed opportunity of our time »


Acid Comments

While they're in China.

I wonder if any of the NZ team will be game (pardon the pun) to try aborted baby fetus soup and similar Chinese dishes made from aborted babies for around $40?

This is the country we want a free trade agreement with.

IMO: Not just this issue, but many other appalling practices and human rights injustices. China should never have been the host for the 2008 Olympics.

I wonder how many $$$ they bribed some of the IOC reps for the hosting rights?


not me. way too pricey.


The corruption of the IOC would be a post in itself.

In fact there could be a whole book written on the subject.


Goodness me Andrei, I am speechless over this one!

ANY Board, Organisation or Team must have official spokespeople. And the spokesperson must speak on behalf of those he/she represents - not pump their personal spin. Surely you must understand the reason for that!

If any athlete is uneasy about the politics of China, the correct option is to stay at home.

The 1981 tour is a good example of what should happen - the players kept their heads down and the objectors mad themselves unavailable.

If bombs start going off (like when NZ Cricket was in Sri Lanka one time) then the decision is to stay or go. We can't expect those who remain to be scrapping internally over political differences.

Have I been too successful at promoting a liberal message Andrei?

I can see where Keith Locke is coming from but he overlooks the real world issues here. Every sportsman who qualifies and does all preparations to go to the Olympic Games must be given the chance to perform - without political distractions from their teammates.

Also it is New Zealand that is on display here - hopefully a coherent and proud display that we can all be proud of. It is not the role of Olympic teams to divide their own nations!!

David White

If you have a bouquet for Keith Locke on this issue, then what do you have to say to him and the Greens on their stance on the Electoral Finance Act?

It is totally hypocritical for them to protest about freedom of speech for olympians in a foreign country, and vote against freedom of speech at home.


Also it is New Zealand that is on display here - hopefully a coherent and proud display that we can all be proud of. It is not the role of Olympic teams to divide their own nations!!

I think you will find Peter that New Zealand is not particularly divided over their opinion on the state of Human Rights in China. Everybody I know, left or right seems to be in accord over this.


I stated in my post that there is very little that I agree with the greens over.
That doesn't mean that when they take a position I agree with them on I shouldn't say so. In fact it is worthwhile to do so because they do have a role in our civic life and taking a rigid partisan stand is an unhelpful thing to do when our common goal is to build a better society for ourselves and our children.

What we disagree on is the best way to go about it and sometimes what are the important features of a civil society and what are not.

Just because Keith Locke is wrong on the EFB doesn't mean he is wrong in this case.

Andrew Davies

I don't think David said you were wrong to agree with Locke on this one. Like myself, I suspect he disagrees with your statement
"And when I think about it, although I am usually at odds with the Greens over their policies and on their basic philosophies they have a virtue that I do admire - they stick up for what they believe in and tend to be utterly consistent in upholding the values they adhere to. Regardless of the political consequences of doing so."

What people say is one thing, what they actually do is another. Keith Locke is the worst kind of hypocrite and I thought Andrei you would have seen that.

Andrew Davies

And BTW, that is not saying locke is wrong in this case.

Andrew Davies

And I tend to agree with Peter. If you don't like what they do there then do not go. Taxpayers contribute to and support athletes to compete, not to grandstand.



What you seem to be saying is that NZ should boycott the Olympic Games in China!

Or, alternatively, make it like Moscow - boycotted at a high level, but over to individual athletes if they want to attend.

All of which makes no sense at all, because China is a significant trading partner not only with NZ but with everybody else. Do we know if other countries are boycotting Beijing.

I think I HAVE heard of individual athletes that are refusing to go there. There was on NZer mentioned the other day but cant remember who it was.

Andrei - the EFB is a red herring and I agree with you here. There is nothing wrong with looking at things on an issue by issue basis.

Acid Comments

"Or, alternatively, make it like Moscow - boycotted at a high level, but over to individual athletes if they want to attend."

Well the 2008 Olympic Games shouldn't have been awarded to China in the firstplace.

The're some calls for a boycott.

Here's just a few websites.

Boycott 2008 Communist Olympics Blog:

Boycott China Olympics 2008:

Reporters without Borders:


To expand on points raised in this thread.

Is Keith Locke a hypocrite?
Probably but aren't we all to some extent. Does any particular piece of hypocrisy on his part stand out to me? Not really except for the hypocrisy that I see as implicit in the left - that is thay pretend to care about the poor but many of their policies hurt the poor far more than the rich. Example: the new emission standards on imported cars will raise the price of the newly imported cars and this will flow onto raise the prices of the existing cars in NZ fleets thus making it harder for the poor to own a car and if they do it will be a car in poorer condition than otherwise.

Boycotting the Games
I'd be appalled if the Government mandated a boycott, disappointed if the NZ Olympic committee made this decision.

If an individual sportsman who had qualified and been selected decided not to go to make his feelings known I'd cheer that man (or woman).

In 1968 Tommie Smith (Gold Medal winner) and John Carlos (Bronze medal winner) in the 200 metres gave the black power salute on the winners podium in Mexico city. The silver medalist in that event, Australian Peter Norman gave his tacit support to this by wearing an Olympic project human rights badge.

Outrage ensued the two Americans were sent home in disgrace. This is before my time and I am not sure how I feel about their cause. However they did stand up and pay the price. Although today they have acquired a more heroic status.

And so that should be if protest means anything.

More recently Andy Flower and Henry Olonga donned black armbands during a world cup cricket match in Harare. If you don't know why just think Robert Mugabe and it will get you there.

It ended their international cricket careers. Again a high price paid for principle, particularly in the case of Henry Olonga.

This I admire and I suppose that it is the authorities stepping in, both the NZ Olympic committee and government to prevent an athlete acting on a matter of conscience that has got up my nose.

And also disturbing to me is the dishonesty implicit in the clause which precludes any action that someone may take objection too, innocuous though it may be.



Do be clear about Andy Flowers and Henry Olonga. They were protesting against their OWN government!

Similarly, the actions of Tommie Smith and John Carlow were relevant to the Black Civil Rights movement in the USA.

What you and Keith Locke are advocating is that an athlete under the New Zealand flag, engaged to play sport for his/her country, should subvert their mission to carry out political activity against the Chinese government!

What if it were a member of a Rowing crew?

We have diplomatic channels to express our country's displeasure and we should do that.

And at a personal level Andrei, you and Keith are welcome to boycott goods main in China. If you can!!

Ha Ha Ha !!!


Do they honestly not see the kind of evil regime they are forbidding their people to criticise? Hard to know which is worse, China's sins or those who will not allow legitimate criticism of them.

The wording of the clause is very similar to that of the British Olympic team. They have a line in their contracts they must agree to or otherwise they won't be allowed to go. Its raising quite a fuss over there given both the state of China's human rights record and the already strong propensity for PC behaviour in Britain.

Interestingly the USA and even Canada(!) have deliberately not included such a clause as they view the rights of the individual competitor to be of greater worth than avoiding any public "unpleasantness". Good for them.

Having been to China just after Tianemen Square I am fully aware of how there is the "official" truth which the govt spouts and the real truth that every man & his dog knows as being the reality. To acquiese to such a clause is to play the silly game of our politicians who look to all intents and purposes similarly to be trying to create two sets of "truths" here and in Britain.

Perhaps the competitors should organise a strike unless this clause is removed?

Sam Finnemore

Acid Comments:

It's amazing how many people seem to believe this story. Google reveals it to be a particularly common meme amongst those opposed to abortion. But that aside, the taboo against cannibalism is just as strong in China as here. What's your source for the $40 a serving claim?

If you're serious about opposing human rights abuses in China - and there are plenty to oppose, I'm not denying that - try and make sure you're not dealing in the ridiculously fictional...

Acid Comments

"If you're serious about opposing human rights abuses in China - and there are plenty to oppose, I'm not denying that - try and make sure you're not dealing in the ridiculously fictional..."


That link is you posted is faked.

The're indeed restraunts in some parts of China selling meals made from Aborted fetus baby parts.

Even the Chinese Govt knows this. Although it's 'officially illegal'.

They're even promoted as 'healthfoods.'

Ryan Sproull


Is there any reason to believe the Snopes debunking is faked, besides your word?

Perhaps, I dunno, some evidence of this healthfood aborted foetus baby part meal allegation?

Acid Comments

"Is there any reason to believe the Snopes debunking is faked, besides your word?'

You can tell that photo on snopes is faked which they've been doing the debunking on.

Sam Finnemore

Congratulations, you've accepted that the most compelling 'evidence' I've seen of this story is fake.

So let me ask again: where is your information coming from? The "I heard they sell them as healthfoods for $40" palaver sounds a lot like the email meme.

If you want a China scandal to get behind, I'd suggest Tibet. Or organ harvesting from prisoners. Or Falun Gong. They're far better documented. But you might object to sharing a cause with all those loopy lefties and non-Christians, I suppose.

The comments to this entry are closed.