Oh really?
From another thread "Is Russia ready for Sochi" one of yumyumsuppertime's linked articles, his very first "counterpoint"
Intended to showcase the power of Vladimir Putin’s Russia, they may instead highlight its problems: organized crime, state corruption, and the terrorist threat within its borders...
But if you're really insistent on it being this thread:
Australian Republic wrote:Why not mention the terrorism in the name of the thread?
I guess doing a thread search for "terror, terrorist, and terrorism" is apparently too complex.
Avenio wrote:Shofercia wrote:Saying "boohoo a large country with over a hundred million people, spanning a good chunk of the planet, and having recently emerged from a troubled time period of semi-anarchy is having problems with corruption and authoritarianism" - well no shit Sherlock.
That's not really the issue here, though. The issue is that hosting the Olympics is an invitation for that corruption to descend and take advantage of the money that pours in.
And it's also an invitation for people to come in and see that corruption while it's busy at the Olympic trough, which makes this sort of complaining about 'Russophobia' or the like a bit disingenuous. If your country has problems with entrenched corruption, why invite the world to come and see it in action? One would think that Russia's priority should be dealing with that first, if for no other reason than to spare itself having to deal with things like the 8 billion dollar road in Sochi.
Since I've heard this crap over and over again, why don't I actually address the only fact that in post, i.e. the "8 billion dollar road". Oh wait, I have!
Shofercia wrote:Sochi spent $51 billion on the Olympics. Since this is the most, Russophobes usually tout this number as "hurr durr Rusha iz corruptz, lolzorz!" What they don't realize is that Sochi's infrastructure had to be rebuilt from the ground up: http://darussophile.com/2014/01/shreddi ... -good-way/
For instance, it'd be pointless comparing Sochi to Vancouver, since Vancouver had most of the infrastructure in place. Likewise, Russia could've held the Olympics in Leningrad/St. Petersburg, and the cost would be reduced in half, perhaps to even a third or fourth of that sum. But the Games should be in Sochi, for several reasons:
1. Provides jobs for a region that's only been stable for a couple of years
2. Develops sports infrastructure in that region, i.e. Krasnodar Krai has no hockey team, whereas Sakha Republic does.
3. Provides a Russian ski resort, so that wealthy Russians stop spending money abroad
4. Promotes quite a bit of cultural interaction between Russians and Caucasians, thus providing Russia with Unity
And so on...
On the actual Olympics, only $7 billion was spent, out of which only $3 billion was spent by the Government.The first and foremost attack revolved around the supposed corruption surrounding the Sochi Olympics. In 2010, the Russian magazine Esquire estimated that 48km of roads around Sochi consumed a cool $8 billion of taxpayer money, a sum that implied the asphalt might as well have been made of elite beluga caviar. Julia Ioffe cheerily transmitted these sophomoric calculations to the Anglosphere. The only problem with these actuarial wisecracks? Said road also included a railway, 50 bridges, and 27km worth of tunnels over mountainous terrain… which presumably made it something more than just a road. What was intended as a metaphor for Sochi corruption turned out to be, ironically, a metaphor for unfounded attacks against it...The lion’s share of the $50 billion investment in Sochi – some 80% of it or so – consists of infrastructure projects to make Sochi into a world-class ski resort that will provide employment in the restive North Caucasus, kickstart the development of a Russian snowsports culture, and draw at least some of the more patriotic elites away from Courcheval.
Courcheval is a Russian symbol of elites wasting too much money abroad, and it's also a World class ski resort.Consequent criticisms become increasingly deranged and unhinged from reality, much like the murderous HAL supercomputer fading away into childish gibberishness after it gets turned off. Thousands of people got evicted, their land stolen from them… except that the average compensation per person was $100,000. Sochi is apparently built on the bones of Circassians… well, if it’s a graveyard, I wonder what that makes the North American continent - a death world? The assertion that Sochi is an ”unsuitable subtropical resort” with no snow… an assessment that would surely surprise the denizens of California’s Bay Area, who go skiing in Tahoe up until late April, and where average February temperatures are significantly higher than around Sochi.
Let's look at your article, which is typical amongst those bullshitting, oh, I'm sorry, I should say, criticizing, Russia. I'll skip his "phenomenal and superb, and amazing" introductory paragraph, pointing out that an expensive resort could be a heap of trouble with all of the wit that Owen Gibson could muster, and get right down to the facts:
And that's before you get to more prosaic concerns over whether there is going to be enough snow in a resort where temperatures reach 30C in the summer and remain a relatively mild 10C even in February.
Not entirely sure if Guardian correspondents have access to Google, but looking at sample weather data, I'm seeing temperatures between 8 and -5, which would only average out to 10 in lala land. Also known as journalism for some. Of course knowing that snow wasn't going to be an issue is as easy as looking up the previous events held in Roza Khutor: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosa_Khuto ... d_Cup_2012
This would of course require someone to enter "Roza Khutor" into Google, and click on a few links, a task that's apparently too daunting for Mr. Gibson. Of course he continues:
The opposition figures Leonid Martynyuk and Boris Nemtsov claimed in a May report that up to $30bn of the budget had gone missing in "kickbacks and embezzlement" to close associates of Putin, claiming the Games had turned into a "monstrous scam".
It's a tad disingenuous of Mt. Gibson to not point out that Nemtsov is butthurt at Putin. After all, dear old Boris had such a nice spot under Yeltsin. And then Putin came along, and Yeltsinites nike Nemtsov weren't in demand any longer. Bawww! Of course the largest factual claim for corruption was a third:
A Swiss member of the International Olympic Committee has publicly conceded an embarrassing reality that most Russians have long known about: the looming Sochi Olympics have been a virtual potlatch of corruption, with about a third of the $55 billion in mostly-state expenditures siphoned off in bribes and kickbacks by greedy officials.
In order to find this article, it was necessary to enter "Sochi, IOC, Corruption" into Google, again, a task too daunting for Mr. Gibson. But $30 billion is a third of $55 billion? Damn, now I'm beginning to understand why policies of bold reformers, like Nemtsov, caused the collapse of the Russian stock market in 1998. Also, it was actually $51 billion, not $55 billion, but hey, what's $4 billion amongst friends? Unless it's Russia, in that case we should all yell HURR DURR CORRUPTION!!!
I've already addressed the road.
Meanwhile, Amnesty International has already voiced concerns over Putin's recent crackdown on freedom of expression, best exemplified by the Pussy Riot case.
Pussy Riot wasn't about "freedom of expression". Doing the equivalent of walking into a Japanese meditation garden, and blasting loud music isn't freedom of expression. It's being a giant dick to your fellow human beings. Or a riotous pussy. Perhaps I should blast loud music outside of Mr. Gibson's home on random nights, and go around telling others how it's freedom of speech. There's a difference. Did they deserve to go to jail? Certainly not. But let's not pretend that Pussy Riot was arrested over merely speaking their minds.
By the time the Olympic flame reaches Sochi on 7 February next year for the opening day of the Games, along with 5,500 athletes from 80 countries
Actually for Winter Olympics, it's about 2,500-3,000 athletes. Not 5,500. But expecting even rudimentary fact checking from Mr. Gibson is apparently too much. I can go on if you'd like.
Is there also valid criticism of Russia in Owen Gibson's article? Certainly. But when you mix bullshit and fact, you're doing journalism a disservice, and I hope that's something that we can all agree on.


