Response of President of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), Craig Reedie (pictured above) to International Olympic Committee chief Thomas Bach’s demand for a sweeping overhaul of the World Anti-Doping Agency: “I would like to think not all the system is broken, that part of the system is broken, and we should start to identify those parts that need full attention.” | FABRICE COFFRINI/AFP/Getty Images
For just over two years, orchestrated revelations and allegations of Russian doping have been grabbing the headlines. An international media campaign is in full swing, attempting to question the participation of Russian athletes in international competitions such as the current 2018 Winter Olympics. Canadian individuals such as Dick Pound, a longtime IOC executive, and law professor Richard McLaren, agencies such as the Canadian Olympic Committee and the CBC and sports media are playing a prominent role in the US-inspired offensive which aims to isolate Russia, dehumanize its athletes and monopolize international sport. The claiming of a moral and ethical high ground is self-righteous indeed, coming from a country where “tanking” by its professional hockey and basketball teams – the deliberate losing of games in order to claim a high draft position – is presented as a norm. For the information of readers, we are printing a 2017 commentary by US sports attorney and scholar RON KATZ* in Forbes that disputes the evidence produced by the learned professor and the process.
* * *
The Russian Sports Minister recently claimed that the so-called McLaren report, which provided the basis for the banning of Russian athletes from the Olympics and Paralympics, would not stand up to legal criticism. Using as an example the U.S. legal system, in which I have worked for 45 years, I agree. The McLaren report, formally called The Independent Person Report (IPR), lacks the basic due process required in the U.S. Court system. Continue reading
“Essentially, the CAS ruled in 2011 that the US athlete could not be punished twice for the same thing, once as a sanction and the second time purportedly as an eligibility decision” | US sports attorney and scholar RONALD KATZ*
The 1960 meeting in Harlem between Fidel Castro and Malcolm X | Universal History Archive/UIG via Getty images
By REBECCA ONION*
San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick, who has recently decided not to stand during the national anthem, wore a Malcolm X hat and a T-shirt featuring images of the leader meeting with Fidel Castro at a press conference where he explained his protest. The T-shirt has, perhaps predictably, drawn criticism from conservative quarters; the Weekly Standard called Kaepernick’s wardrobe choice a “startling display of ignorance,” pointing to what writer Mark Hemingway called Cuba’s human rights abuses and “legacy of racism.” Setting aside an assessment of Castro’s later record on race, and whether it strengthens or undermines Kaepernick’s stance, what’s the story behind those photos, taken a year after the Cuban leader came to power, and five years before Malcolm’s death? Why did the two men meet, and what did they discuss? Continue reading