“Support Our Troops” slogan falls foul of Olympic rules

[Risus]

Risus- no its not a politic statement get you clue look up it in a dictanotry and stop being. Its never been one from the start.

you should know better it seem you guys hate supporting your own troops.. sad very sad... shows how much you care for you so called "country"

I have no intention of going over it all with you again. Read all the previous posts and you will learn something.
We do support our troops, not sad at all, we just don't go into war illegally like you people, and you seem to love it. We care about our country and that was very evident throughout the olympics. If you want to insult Canada, then you are not welcome here.

By the way, don't you yead your inbox messages??

 

[JLM]

I have no intention of going over it all with you again. Read all the previous posts and you will learn something.
We do support our troops, not sad at all, we just don't go into war illegally like you people, and you seem to love it. We care about our country and that was very evident throughout the olympics. If you want to insult Canada, then you are not welcome here.

By the way, don't you yead your inbox messages??

What Nationality are you anyway, Critter?

 

[critter171]

JLM i am from American i was born American the problem with these people is they got a problem with their/our on slogan out of all i would thought they would of supported it from the start.

You can learn something to Risus stand up for yourself. I never insulting Candida your insulting on believes and views of many people in the states here. You are insulting my country.

support our troops is no way and or from anything politics out of it. You have been to war illegal so don't even start it took days for you guys to give word you agree. you have accused of some many things yet. the same thing happens to you when you do to us.

there still plenty there.

 

[gerryh]

Ya know......I've about had it with this little f*ckwad.

 

[Risus]

I never insulting Candida .

Reread your post #119. You referred to Canada as a 'so called "country"'. That is an insult.
And learn to spell it.

 

[Kreskin]

*In my opinion, disqualify him immediately*:canada:

Feb 16, 2010 00:09 EST

Trouble is brewing over United States ice hockey goalie Jonathan Quick and the “Support Our Troops” slogan on his helmet. Slogans of this sort are banned under Olympic rules and Quick will be told to remove it, the International Ice Hockey Federation has told Reuters.

Ryan Miller has also been told to remove the slogan “Miller Time” from his helmet while the third American netminder Tim Thomas had already placed a sticker over a slogan on his mask for the Vancouver Winter Olympics.

IOC rules forbid political propoganda or advertisements being placed on equipment.

“If the players don’t agree with the interpretation they can ask the USOC (United States Olympic Committee) to petition the IOC.”

Miller said he had agreed to remove “Miller Time”, which is also a popular beer company slogan, but might fight to keep “Matt Man”, a tribute to a dead friend from being taken off his helmet.

What do you think? Should athletes be allowed to carry personal or political messages on their clothing or equipment at the Olympic Games? Or is the IOC right to keep such messages out of the Games?

I personally don't have a problem with it. As long as a slogan isn't insulting others it's fine with me. However, I do understand that allowing anything can result in a slippery slope where officials will need to be subjective and thus take heat when they do ban slogans. Probably best not to have any.

 

[gopher]

"Should athletes be allowed to carry personal or political messages on their clothing or equipment at the Olympic Games?"

The IOC needs to remain consistent in the application of its rules. Consider what it did to Juan Carlos in 1968.

 

[Liberalman]

"Should athletes be allowed to carry personal or political messages on their clothing or equipment at the Olympic Games?"

The IOC needs to remain consistent in the application of its rules. Consider what it did to Juan Carlos in 1968.

yes.

 

[CDNBear]

First it was a political statement and had to go.

Not a single one of you has proven this.

 

[gerryh]

Not a single one of you has proven this.

How about the fact that the Olympics are supposed to support peace and brotherhood among nations and people.

"Support our troops" could be construed as support for war. Not that it necessarily is, but that it could be taken that way and thusly is counter productive to the spirit of the Olympics.

 

[JLM]

How about the fact that the Olympics are supposed to support peace and brotherhood among nations and people.

"Support our troops" could be construed as support for war. Not that it necessarily is, but that it could be taken that way and thusly is counter productive to the spirit of the Olympics.

Nah, they are fighting for peace, Ger.

 

[TenPenny]

Not a single one of you has proven this.

Proven what?

 

[JLM]

Proven what?

"That it was a political statement and had to go"

 

[gerryh]

looking at the helmet....only a brain dead moron, or a complete idiot could think that it was not political.

 

[CDNBear]

How about the fact that the Olympics are supposed to support peace and brotherhood among nations and people.

Competition isn't peace.

"Support our troops" could be construed as support for war.

Only by the comprehension-ally challenged, as it's been proven time and time again, that is a support system for the people in the uniform, not the Gov't, nor its wishes. Hence why it's non political either.

Not that it necessarily is, but that it could be taken that way and thusly is counter productive to the spirit of the Olympics.

That's awesome, many people take you the wrong way Gh, does that make them right?

Proven what?

Gh, this is a fine example of "comprehension-ally challenged".

looking at the helmet....only a brain dead moron, or a complete idiot could think that it was not political.

Funny, I was just thinking that only an uniformed, ideologically blinded ass with a grudge, would think it was.

 

[TenPenny]

Gh, this is a fine example of "comprehension-ally challenged".

I'm not sure what you mean by this, can you explain?

 

[CDNBear]

I'm not sure what you mean by this, can you explain?

Thanx for proving my point...

 

[TenPenny]

Thanx for proving my point...

I'm not sure what you mean - are you suggesting that you have a point?

 

[JLM]

I'm not sure what you mean by this, can you explain?

I think he means your "head lights" are running on about 5 watts................:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

 

[gerryh]

what he means is that he is unable to explain or backup his statement.