Monday, February 16, 2009

To (Not) Preserve The Union

by MMT

A lot's been said about the UAE denying Shahar Pe'er a visa to play in the WTA event in Dubai, and more importantly, the inaction, acquiescence and disunity exhibited by the WTA and its players. I would love to see the "leaders" of the WTA (and by leaders, I mean its most prominent players) boycott the event. If they were really a player's association (of course it isn't) they would, but it isn't, so they won't, and what a shame that is. Long lost are the days when this was viewed as a players union.

When was the last time anyone in tennis took a stand in support of a player who'd been screwed? Guillermo Vilas was suspended for 12 months for taking an appearance fee in March of 1983 at the Rotterdam tournament - the very same tournament that Andy Murray just won this weekend. While many spoke out in support of him, not a single player on tour protested by boycotting anything in support of Vilas, even though they were all doing the same thing.

This is right about the time when money in tennis began to explode, with players easily eclipsing six-digits in prize money for the most lucrative titles.

The last time anybody on the ATP put up a fight on anyone's behalf was 1973 when Niki Pilic (former German Davis Cup captain and an early coach of Novak Djokovic) was banned from Wimbledon after his refusing to play Davis Cup for Yugoslavia. 81 of the top 128 players in the world boycotted Wimbledon that year, including the defending champion Stan Smith, who's probably about the nicest guy ever to play tennis (maybe him and Barry McKay) and who probably cost himself a second Wimbledon title. Some pretty good players joined him, including Arthur Ashe, Rod Laver, Ken Rosewall, John Newcombe and Roy Emerson just to name a few. It could be argued that they did it for selfish reasons as well - I mean if Yugoslavia could do it to Pilic, who's to say Tennis Australia or the USTA couldn't have done it to them as well? But somehow, after all those years playing professionally, or playing for daily allowances, I doubt their reasons were entirely ego-centric - not 81 players anyway.

Now that was a union.

And there were some ignominious absentees from the band of brothers who apparently didn't see it the way the aforementioned stalwarts did. Ilie Nastase, who probably needed the money for current or future alimony, an 18-year old Bjorn Borg who probably didn't give a hoot, and a 21-year Jimmy Connors, who definitely didn't give a hoot, all played that year - and perhaps poetically all lost. In any case, aside from Emerson, there's probably never been a player who has been so lowly regarded for winning Wimbledon as Jan Kodeš. A good player who never won another Slam in his career, Kodes, it's worth pointing out, probably couldn't have boycotted if he wanted; just 5 years removed from Russian tanks rolling through Prague and an oppressive regime tapping their phone lines and harassing them for their prize-money (and by harassing, I mean threatening their family members).

Kodeš holds his Wimbledon trophy aloft in the year of The Strike

Irony of ironies: Vijay Armitraj, one of the most successful Indian tennis players in history, played Wimbledon that year. He was just 20 years old, was an up-and-coming player, and lost in the quarterfinal to the eventual champion Kodeš, who was seeded 2nd - his highest ever seeding.

A year later, in 1974, as India was on the verge of its first and only Davis Cup final victory, against South Africa, their tennis federation forfeited the final in protest against apartheid. It remains the only time in the history of the cup that the final has been forfeited.

Armitraj was so upset with the federation that he threatened to quit Davis Cup altogether. He didn't, and had to wait another 13 years before he participated in another Davis Cup final. By then, long past his prime, he lost 1 live rubber to Anders Jarryd and one dead rubber to Mats Wilander. Karma? Who knows...

By 1988 Armitraj had refused several opportunities to play exhibitions in South Africa for political reasons, so it just goes to show you that sometimes, even a man with every reason to take a stand, who has to be dragged kicking and screaming to do so, can eventually come around. So while it may be stupefyingly naive of me to wish that tennis millionaires today would be willing to do the right thing and boycott Dubai, it is not without precedent.

Apparently the wealthy athletes of today, like many wealthy people in society, have no interest in preserving any union.


Helen W said...

Great post, MMT!

I'd just love to see them walk off the court and go home.

Karen said...

You know I am a big fan of Serena and Venus Williams, but one of the things that always turns me off against them was their stance on certain issues. Serena Williams is a very well respected tennis player, as are most of the women in the top 10, but Serena, being the champion that she is, is revered the world over regarding tennis. Akin to how people feel about Roger Federer. I am just aghast that neither sister, especially Venus have come out in support of Shahara. Usually when it comes to things in the middle east I am usually one of those who believe that when in Rome you do as the Romans do, but in this case, Shahar clearly qualified to play the event, she should have been allowed to participate. Serena/Venus have taken a stand against IW for something that happened there almost 10 years ago. Clearly, they do take a stand on principles, and I would hope that even if no one else came out in support of Shahar that these 2 ladies having experienced discrimination (The Black List spoke volumes) in their chosen field of endeavour would have at least spoken up about this. Like him or not or agree or disagreed with him or not, Roger had an opinion on everything, even if he put his foot in mouth many times in articulating the same. Wish that Serena/Venus would try and do the same. In case anyone is wondering why I have tagged these 2for criticism in this piece. Venus is lauded as being instrumental in having Wimbledon award equal prize money and Serena is a 10 time Grand Slam champion, who would not listen to those 2?

dearg said...

Thanks Craig for your eloquent post.

More money, less morals.
More privilege, less principles.

Craig Hickman said...

dearg, thank MMT one newest contributiing editor.

Pamela said...

Karen, to my knowledge Venus has come out and said that it was wrong and that politics shouldn't be a part of tennis. I can't remember if Serena said something, I think she did. Dinara, and Ana I have also said something.

They will say something, but they are NOT going to give up that kind of cash for one player who isn't a top player, and even if she was a top baller - they probably still wouldn't.

Craig Hickman said...

Pamela, no they won't.

And yet none of the top players actually need the money.

dearg said...

Oh I am sorry, I need glasses pronto.
Thank you MMT!

As I said before it was a very eloquent post.
The brotherhood of man, I wish…

Craig Hickman said...

I actually wonder what Billie Jean King has to say about this.

Karen said...

The fact of the matter is that just as how Serena/Venus have boycotted a tournament that is a top tier tournament on the tour,hen they should be willing to boycott this one as well. Matter of fact all the top lady ballers should have boycotted the tournie. It is not like the event is well attended in any event, as every year that I have seen it on tv it always looks very sparsely attended. frankly speaking the middle east has been rying its best to get into many sporting events by throwing a lot of money at tournament organisers. However, I think they should really use the opportunity when negotiating to ensure that there is inclusion on every level and that there is no discrimination. I guess that will never happen. Craig, somehow I do not think we will hear from BJK on this one. I know that it is a very touchy subject and really you do not want to come across as trying to strong arm people, but come on, the girl qualified. She is not a top ranked player but she qualiifed and therefore eligible to play. She should have been allowed to play.

tangerine said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
dearg said...

I found on the New York Times, The Tennis Channel won't televise the Dubai event as a protest.
I agree with Karen I don't think we will here from BJK on this, I sincerely hope I'm wrong.

Helen W said...

tangerine I too felt like Roger, having a second dwelling in Dubai, should make a statement, particularly as he has so recently demonstrated his willingness to comment on WTA matters :)

That being said, this is the WTA, so first and foremost, I would expect the leading players of the WTA to, well, lead. They should boycott the tournament, pure and simple. As Craig says, it's not like they need the money. And it's not like there is any huge downside for them.

rabbit said...

I also agree that Roger should make a strong statement, given that Dubai is his second home. Let us see...

rabbit said...

Oh, and forgot to say, thanks to MMT for such a great post! Such a wealth of new information and so well put. Thanks again :)

HoiHa said...

I struggle with this sports "boycott" issue tremendously.

On the one hand I do believe sincerely, in the abstract ideal world, that sports and politics should not mix. And this is really what we are arguing here isn't it? Dubai is playing politics to punish Israel over its latest action in Gaza (yes I know that Israeli's are typically denied visas to enter the UAE but they often make exceptions for athletes including tennis players and I suspect would have done so here prior to the latest violence in Gaza).

So we are asking Dubai not to play poltics and allow Peer a visa for the tourny.

Yet in other instances we are on the reverse end of it - does anybody really disagree that the sports boycott against apartheid South Africa (together with investment and other boycotts of course) played a role in ending apartheid there? Of course it did. And was that not the right thing to do morally to end one of the most reprehensible of all systems?

And what of the Beijing Olympics? There was a big part of me - and especially as I live in Hong Kong -that wanted a boycott of Beijing because my heart bleeds for the genocide that continues in Tibet and parts of Western China (never mind the other human rights abuses occuring in China). Yet I live in China and make a living here. Where does that put me on the moral side of these equations? Is simply living here making me morally compromise? Yet I am a lesbian with American citizenship and my "life partner" of many years does not have American citizenship and therefore we have nowhere else to live together because she cannot get into the US (or Jamaica for that matter where I also have citizenship) because our relationship is not legally recognized for immigration purposes.

All I am saying is this sports boycott business is very complicated and we tend to come down on one side or the other depending on our perspective of the issue of the day.

We are talking here about a potential boycott of Dubai - yet I am sure there are many residents of Gaza and many Palestinians who see Dubai's decision as the moral equivalent of denying a visa to a white South African athlete circa 1985 (I personally do not hold this view but I am sure it is widely held in many parts of the Muslim world).

So how do we handle these issues in sports? If we say sports and politics must never mix, then we need to be careful what we wish for. Because next time we might all be watching the Olympic games "live from Nazi Berlin" (so to speak) or Apartheid South Africa.

If we say sports and politics sometimes must mix, then who's politics are we talking about here? And what of the athletes to have a finite number of years in which they may ply their own art?

Personally I don't know what the answer should be - I would love to say politics should never be a part of sport ... but on the other hand ...?

Helen W said...

HoiHa, another very thought-provoking, elegantly-written post from you.

I would just add that in the particular case at hand, to me at least, the situation is clearer than a lot of the cases you mention in your thoughtful post. The terms that the ITF, WTA & ATP all state, very clearly, are that any player who qualifies to play in a tournament must be allowed to play, regardless of country, religion, or race. The UAE & the tournament sponsors were well aware of these rules when they agreed to put on the tournament. It is a bit late in the day to decide that they won't abide by them. .

Some may argue that the recent hostilities in the Middle East amount to a material change in conditions, which justify a change in the position of the UAE. In that case, the UAE should protest the situation by refusing to mount the tournament.
Either way, punishing one private person for the actions of a government never feels right to me.

HoiHa said...

Helen W, I agree with you - in fact I support the WTA pulling the tournament in it's entirety - I suspect that Dubai withheld making public its decision on Peer's visa until the very last minute knowing full well that by that stage moving the tournament to another host country would be logistically impossible. So from that viewpoint I find Dubai's political stance rather disingenuous and rather less principled in practice. And I do not think they should be rewarded for that, which of course the WTA is doing by refusing to pull the plug on the event.

Craig Hickman said...

I love this place. Sure, I'm biased, but there's nothing wrong with loving what's yours.

Carry on.

HoiHa said...

HelenW - PS - thanks for your kind words.

Craig - absolutely - I've been waiting for the darn world to listen to me my whole life :)

Craig Hickman said...

The world is all yours, HoiHa.

postmoderngirls said...

I've left this comment on other blogs, but I think it's relevant to this discussion too. So I'll reproduce it, if that's alright?

Right, the following comment might step on some toes/feet/break something so disclaimer first so people don't start chucking stuff at me:

1) I think what the government of the UAE did is WRONG.
2) I think the WTA needs to stop kissing arse.
3) I grew up in the UAE.
4) I think everything needs context so there is a greater appreciation of the underlying issues.

The United Arab Emirates is an Islamic country. The people (despite it being incredibly cosmopolitan) are staunchly Arab and have much sympathy and empathy for their 'brothers and sisters' in Gaza and Palestine.

This tournament is coming right after the whole Gaza debacle. The Arab world is furious about the impotence of the international community, international organisations and yes, is really; really pissed off at Israel.

This is the current context.

However. I don't believe that Shahar Peer's visa was denied because of this, per se.

If you have an Israeli passport, you cannot enter any of the Arab states- except Egypt, Jordan and Lebanon (if I'm not wrong). And now perhaps Qatar, but I doubt it.

That is the official governmental stance. I don't necessarily see it as Shahar being denied her visa because of Gaza or as a statement- but because of the fact that she is Israeli- no matter who the hell she is..she has an Israeli passport. (No, I'm not saying that makes it OK. I'm just stating the facts- or whatever I know about the process)

I mean, it's a hassle just having an Israeli stamp in a passport and then having to explain why and what for and whatever else. And just as a side note so that this doesn't just end up demonising the Arab world and their archaic practices/grudges- if I were to apply for an Israeli visa with all my Arab visas (even though my passport isn't), I would be denied entry.

In fact, if I couldn't support my application to every country I've been to with documents to prove I am who I say I am and that I won't blow anything up and if I were to..they'd know exactly where I was... I probably wouldn't get to go there either.

In any case, I believe the WTA should be dealing with visa formalities and if they weren't aware of these things.. that is also their fault. They [b]should[/b] know these things. It's exactly when organisations apply for their employees' visas. All well and good to say don't mix sports and politics, but we don't live in nicely categorised and separated worlds.

Yeah. Basic point: the government is acting like an arse; but those are their rules (stupid rules, yes)..but the WTA should have known about them and done something much before this so as to ensure that there were other channels they could go through to ensure her visa was granted. It isn't completely unheard of.

Helen W said...

postmoderngirls, thank you for your informative post.

I don't think the WTA is covering itself in glory with its handling of this situation, but I don't agree with you that it is their responsibility to make sure that the laws of countries that apply to host their tournaments comply with the their requirements. Agan, the ITF, WRA, & ATP are all very clear about the fact that any player who qualifies to play must be allowed to play. To me this means that it is up to the organizations applying to host the tournament to make sure they can comply with the rules that they are agreeing to.

postmoderngirls said...

I see your point, but when it decrees that a player 'must' be allowed to play- it implies that the laws and the governing statutes of the nation must be overlooked/bent or whatever else. (This is how I understand it, if I'm wrong, please feel free to say so)
In my opinion, if that is the case then the WTA/ITF/ATP must also make sure that it is done so.
Going by my interactions with most 'institutions' there, they are mostly run by locals who would have to comply with the laws of the country. Now despite, I imagine, their considerable clout; it is quite a task to take on immigration.
And if you are to do so, it is also imperative that the WTA (in this particular) instance use its clout and position to ensure the same. It isn't enough, in my opinion, to have it said that all players must be allowed to play and not ensure that it is so. The onus lies entirely on the organiser then; which in a case like this, can end up causing a huge problem.

As much as the WTA would hate to lose Dubai's investment in women's tennis, Dubai would hate to lose the tournament. DXB has been trying to beef up it's 'tourist destination' portfolio and the tourney is one of it's major draws. I do think that the WTA has a bargaining chip here (not that it should come to that at all- but it has and it should utilise the power it has).

Also, the tournament is now citing security concerns as a reason for denying her visa:

Er. I would agree with the assessment that the public would probably have boycotted the tournament...but, (I'm terrible at maths, so bear with me here please) considering that about 70% -80% of UAE's population is an expat population...of which (taking the lower figure) perhaps 40% is Arab- leaving 30%. Of course of the 30% perhaps only 5% are interested in tennis/are able to attend. I still think that's a considerable number of people.
Also, I don't think there's any real fear of any harm coming to Ms. Peer. The repercussions of that would be severe- I wouldn't trifle with the law there.
In my opinion, that last statement is them trying to cover their tracks and hope that the WTA and ATP don't pull out and say 'damn the money!'.

postmoderngirls said...

(sorry about my uber long and somewhat pointless post :$)

MMT said...

Thanks for all the comments - great discussion. Dudi Sela is an Israeli tennis player as well, currently ranked #86 - will he also be denied a visa if he tries to qualify? Also, is there any precedent for this?

MMT said...

postmodergirls: very good point about the rules - UAE laws, and their immigration department are not subject to the ATP's rules, and the tournament is not "responsible" for this either.

However, in this case, if any of the organizers are a part of the government or the monarchy, I think they have an implicit obligation to do "everything" in their power to make sure whatever exceptions are available are accessible to Ms. Peer.

Has no Israeli has ever legally visited the UAE?

tangerine said...

Roger just withdrew from Dubai (and Davis Cup) citing a back injury:

Dear Fans,

Today I am disappointed to announce that I am withdrawing from both Dubai and the Davis Cup tie in the United States. This was a hard decision to make as I am missing not only one of my favorite events on tour in Dubai but I am also missing out on an opportunity to help my country try and move on to the next round of Davis Cup. After injuring my back last fall, I did not have enough time to strengthen it completely. As a precautionary measure, I will use the next few weeks to make sure the back injury is fully rehabilitated and I am ready for the rest of the 2009 season.

As always, thanks for your continued support.

His statement is interesting only for the Pink Elephant he refuses to acknowledge that's standing right next to him.

rabbit said...

Perhaps, he will make a statement yet, tangerine...

Helen W said...

postmoderngirls, when my company responds to an RFP (Request For Proposal) we are stating that we have read and understood the document, and will comply with all of its terms & conditions. If there is some condition that we take issue with, we are free to raise the issue with the organization who issued the RFP, to see if the terms can be negotiated. But the issuer is not responsible for ensuring that we are in a position to do what we say we will do. Of course they would be wise to check our bona fides, to be comfortable with our ability to meet their needs, but that is a different matter entirely from making sure that we will abide with the legalities of the contract.

MMT said...

Sorry Tangerine: what's the Pink Elephant?

dearg said...

The Big Kahuna of Media, News Corp which owns Dow Jones & company.
It's newspaper The Wall Street Journal has dropped its sponsorship of the Dubai Championship.
News Corp runs SKY TV, DTV cablevision, etc.

tangerine said...

MMT, the elephant in the room is an expression for ignoring the obvious.

MMT said...

I'm a lot dumber than I look...I mean, I'm not as smart as I look...what's the obvious? The situation with Peer?

Lior said...

[repost to correct a significant typo]

postmoderngirls: The government of the UAE is free to have any policies it desires regarding admitting Israelis. It's important to keep in mind, however, that the UAE is under no obligation to host a WTA event. When they chose to do so (out of their own free will) they also chose to follow the WTA rules. If they didn't like the WTA policy of admitting all qualified players, they should have not applied to run the tournament.

Regarding your claims about Israeli visas: have you ever applied for one? A few years ago I participated in a workshop in Israel. One of the invited speakers was a native of a Muslim country that does not recognize Israel. The organizers had to contact the Israeli Foreign Office and confirm the situation before they were willing to issue him a visa, but at the end he got the visa. Actually, one of the organizers of the workshop was Iranian (who has been living in the US for a long time) and this wasn't even an issue.

baselinegames said...

MMT, I would assume that someone from the royal family (even a lowly cousin or something -rolls eyes-) is on the payroll. I agree about the obligation to do it- did they? I'm not too sure.
I suppose a few have- but they'd either have dual-passports (they would use the other one) or they needed to be there for something. If memory serves me correctly, when the IMF (I think it was? Or another international organisation- I'll look it up) met in Dubai a few years ago, Israel did have representation- though that might be because of a diplomatic passport.
Illegally and sometimes overlooked by the government- I'm sure there are several cases of it. You hear rumours ;)

Helen W, I understand that point. But I doubt either the WTA or Dubai even thought this through. No excuse, but I don't think they considered the possibility or understood its implications when they settled on the terms.

Lior, on your first point- yes, I agree. Like I said above; I doubt they ever expected or even planned ahead for such a thing and in my opinion, you can blame both parties for faulty planning.

Just as a side note (though it might seem like I'm splitting hairs) Iran is not Arab, it is Persian.

And yes, I have. I applied last august for a visa to attend a Peace workshop. I supplied all the required documents and forms all filled out. I even applied (obviously because there wouldn't be an embassy or consulate in an Arab country, except Qatar...which has also closed down the office) from Austria and my visa application was rejected. I spoke to a few Israeli friends and they suggested that I get a fresh passport and apply again because it's probably my visas. However, doing that is sort of pointless because I'd then have to have another passport made so I could get into UAE again.

Your point still raises the idea that you do have to jump through hoops to get your visa. In my opinion, this is something the WTA should've been aware of- visa work is hell and government whims are unpredictable. If it is going to host a tournament in a country it should know its regulations and either work with them, cut a deal to ensure that it won't pose a problem or don't hold it there.

Helen W said...

baselinegames, according to this article in the Times Online, Andy Ram was granted a visa to play in Dubai last year.

In addition, with regard to the ATP's tournament at Dubai:

Last year, as it first had been in 1993 when the tournament was initially sanctioned, the ATP was assured that no one would be barred from competing if their ranking justified a place in the draw.

This makes it clear that the ITF, WTA, & ATP have been very clear about this issue for years. The UAE clearly abbrogated their agreement, and they do not have a leg to stand on with regard to their behaviour.

b said...

As someone who has experienced the effects of apartheid up close and personal it amazes me that people keep bring up South Africa in comparison - on the wrong side of the issue....

If anything the issue of apartheid and how it was ended (i.e. political pressure, international boycotts and athlete exclusion) justifies the UAEs exclusion of Shahar Peer.

Are people aware that Israel directly identified with Apartheid South Africa and Rhodesia and that a lot of it's modern policies are a result of not wanting to end up with majority rule etc etc

You can support UAE, it's not that which I'm writing about but the claim of racism.

And no, I don't buy the "sports and politics don't mix" - sports have been used to advance many political causes - so now are we going to condemn the 1968 Black Power Salute, Muhammad Ali, Arthur Ashe's efforts and countless others? Should Cathy Freeman not have celebrated her victory lap with the aboriginal flag? Are people only going to supports politics and sports mixing when they agree with the politics?

If anything you could perhaps liken Shahar Peer's request to that of Arthur Ashe's efforts to play in South Africa - and even that is a bit of a stretch as he was applying solely for making a political statement.....

Shahar has chosen to remain in the military, even after completing her compulsory service. That is her choice and she has every right to do so...... but her choice to remain an active reservist while pursuing a pro career is hardly apolitical.

There are many many athletes who changed nationality from south african or rhodesian to be able to compete......

Please don't accuse me of hating on Peer - she's actually one of my favorite players..... despite the fact that she has made her politics clear and I don't agree with them....

For Pe'er to uphold her political and national beliefs a few ranking points are a small price (IMO)..... In contrast, please name me the pro players for Palestine (male or female) - I don't recall any....

And no, I don't think it was fair for this to come about last minute although I thought Ram had been denied last year. It is not clear to me whether Pe'er should have known there was going to be an issue as Israeli Nationals are not permitted unless they are have another passport.

Lior said...

baselinegames: sorry to hear you were refused a visa, especially to participate in a peace event. Dialogue is important.

Of course the Persians are not Arabs; it's just that Iran has been far more violent against Israel than the Gulf States, and yet it's not even an issue that an Iranian organizes an event in Israel.

Yes, you have to jump through hoops to arrange a visa for a national of a country that doesn't recognize yours, but it's something you have to do when you invite such a person to your event. If the people who invited you didn't have sufficient contacts in the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs then they didn't do their job. This wouldn't be a problem for an international sporting event though.

It seems that Dubai was giving the WTA the runaround for a year, pretending they would issue the visas. It also seems that the WTA didn't have the spine to issue a timely ultimatum. The ATP Tour is waffling in exactly same way -- they should set an immediate ultimatum regarding Andy Ram's visa rather than wait till Sunday, so that they'll have time to cancel the tournament if need be.

Graf_sampras said...

i have been commenting on the comments here regarding the "injustice" towards Peer....i hope people will take the time to consider my take on it, which is similar to those by Brooklyn10009 and baseliner.

i consider some comments in knee-jerk support for the "justice" of having peer be in dubai to be mal-informed about the longer history of the middle east...western imperialism ...Zionism and the state of israel as the "vanguard" of THAT western imperialism today..

DESPITE what baseliner had pointed out is her INHERENT political position AS a soldier of israel "moonlighting" as a tennis player ...and then USING that position as a tennis player to be treated "neutrally" , "independent of her political reality as a soldier" ...

and to have her political position as citizen of a state that has taken land from palestinians (which even their FOUNDER david-ben-gurion admitted WAS wrong and criminal but they did it anyway -- there are plenty of unabashed statements by him and other :"founders" to be found easily) .

i am sorry that my FIRST participation in this commentaries page is to say that many of the assumptions about "who is right" and "just" in this matter are simply MAL=INFORMED.

it is akin to saying that if the NATIVE INDIANS tried today to "fight" to get back their lands from the white man's burden "structure" of society that has become the Imperial USA -- the native indians are "terrorists".

Graf_sampras said...

I would also enjoin some of you to REALLY LOOK -- after all the pablum about "terrorists in gaza are shooting rockets into israel" -- while some of you FORGET how Israel as a state WAS stolen from palestinians -- and called by NO LESS than NELSON MANDELA as policies that are "ISRAEL's OWN Apartheidt"...

and then read an article (warning...there ARE very disturbing photos israel and western media would NOT want you to see) - written by a JEWISH lady..visiting Gaza..

Graf_sampras said...

People can not profess being offended at the "injustice" towards Peer - while looking away from what HER country has done to palestinians -- PART of which is what ALLOWS HER to "moonlight" as a tennis player ! while palestinians whose lands were stolen from them, who were subjected to what the ZIONISTS led by David-ben-gurion to an offical Israeli state creation policy of "THE LAW OF EXPULSION" in order to free up land from self-professed Jews with their SUPPOSED claims on "what god gave us" (in itself a MYTH anyway). that is just an example of "cognitive dissonance" :

the ability to hold two opposing views at the same time and accept both as equally valid.

Graf_sampras said...

I also challenge everyone to a mental exercise:

IMAGINE 3,000 years from now...that the USA still exists -- and americans tell a story in a "bible" of sorts that says "the land - america was GIVEN To us BY GOD"........

while people forget that they were originally -- WHITE SETTLERS -- as zionists today are descended largely from WHITE european settlers calling themselves Jews --

and then saying there "were no such things as NATIVE INDIANS" ....

as zionists sometimes claimed "there is no such thing as a Palestinian"...

when in reality -- as even some ISRAELI scholars are , to the anger of israelis, saying that "there is NO such thing as a Jewish diaspora...there was a religion that called itself judaism...but it was PART of an inherently palestinian entity...WE , as "jews" are actually a self-created MYTH".

Graf_sampras said...

and the funny thing is -- i have had several ISRAELI jewish friends who told me, in private....the bible IS a was made was as much body of superstition by a group of people among other groups of people to find their own identity ..but there is no such thing as being the "chosen people" was made up as our way of making ourselves special". ...and was one reason some of them refused to serve in the israeli army and left israel or stay at risk of being imprisoned.

Graf_sampras said...

I also want to re-emphasize something either brooklyn or baseliner said:

why is it somehow acceptable to the western media and point of view that it is somehow "unjust" that an israeli is refused entrance to a WTA event in Dubai - and the "sportsmanship" is brought into the argument to support this view - while it was somehow ALSO acceptable for the USA and western nations to "boycott" the south african olympics decades ago or boycott the Russian Olympics

when it is ALSo clear that THAT was done on the basis of POLITICS in terms of western domination in global affairs?...

what does it matter if the reasons by the west against russia was that it was "communist tyranny" - or against south africa that it was "apartheidt"

SO LONG as they could "boycott for political reason":

AND THEN -- the DUBAI people , and citizens , CAN NOT SOMEHOW USE a political reason from THEIR point of view - BOYCOTT an ISRAELI -- representative of western politics

WHICH -- is CENTERED on the israeli zionist state's repression and subjugation and treatment of palestinians as less than human or worthy a HUNDRED palestinian lives to a "precious" israeli life?

how come - when it is from a western point of view...BOYCOTTING olympics are OK for political reasons - -

but the SAME western oriented views behind the wTA , ATP, MEDIA, politics are themselves USING politics to "boycott DUBAI" for DUBAI's perceived political "boycott" of a POLITICAL entity such as PEER representative of a POLITICAL reality of oppression by israel of the palestinians?

are we talking here of a certain SUPREMACY of "thought" by the west that decides when and for what reason POLITICAL boycotts are GOOD -- even if -- aNOTHER critical fundamental question deserves to be raised in these affairs:

"WHAT IS THE UNITED STATES , ENGLAND, and their Vanguard ISrael representing the western point of view of reality DOING in the Middle east , central asia and other far corners of the globe if NOT for THEIR continued imperialistic POLITICAL economic reasons?"

i would like for people to answer THAT simple question. ...along with attendant questions of history....the history of imperialism by the west in lands it doesn't own but happen to have PLENTY of resources the west wants...such as :

"what is the USA doing having over 700 military installations across the globe where it doesn't belong?"

"what is ISRAEL as a PROXY western vanguard over the middle east doing expanding settlements which it doesn't own? but belongs to others it has "expelled" -- admittedly so by ITS own founders?"

"what is the USA doing in the region of CENTRAL ASIA and building military presence RIGHT next Door to RUSSIA or CHINA ?"

or would it take the simple CORRECT question by the writer Pat buchanan...despite MY personal disgust with his domestic politics ....:

"WE didn't like it when the soviet union was in OUR .......what are WE doing in Russia's neighborhood?"

are westerners - including in these viewpoints about the shahar peer affair , wta, being OFFENDED by the "injustice" towards HER -- but somehow not offended by israel's mistreatment of the palestinians -

really THAT convinced that the western worldview is somehow THAT superior?

b said...


Karen -- I really hate when black and/or other minority players who have fought for the right to play in their sports, who were/are unwillingly accepted, are relentlessly called upon to be paragons of virtue and tireless freedom fighters for other pet issues. Even if they didn't already have enough on their plates - the idea in itself is inherently discriminatory.
This is like the feminists calling on Tiger Woods (of all the men on the PGA) to boycott a tournament for them.
Further, if Peer wants to follow the Williams' sisters example she should boycott Dubai from now on..... When did anyone else support the sisters boycott of IW?

b said...

also posted this in another thread on this page

hadn't realised there were also bans on yugoslavia

Please note about palestinian team

excerpt note that it is referring to columnist williams not the tennis family....
"But Williams seems unaware of -- or simply indifferent to -- the fact that the Palestinian football team, for example, is routinely denied permission by occupying forces to leave the Palestinian territories to compete in other countries, and is repeatedly denied the travel permits necessary to travel from one part of the occupied Palestinian territories to another to train. Yes, these travel permits are the same as those issued to indigenous Australians by their colonial-settler ``Protector'' and the same as those issued to black South Africans during that country's apartheid regime. Moreover, Williams seems unaware of -- or simply indifferent to -- the rights of Palestinian children to be, in the worlds of poet Michael Rosen at the January 10 rally for Gaza in London, "not dead".

If delegitimising the acts of internal and international aggression and racism that Israel, as a democratic country, has endorsed at the ballot box for decades -- most recently last week with a massive swing to the (even) far(ther) right -- means disrupting tennis or football business as usual, so be it. The sporting boycott of Israel is in the spirit of bans on South Africa during the apartheid regime, and bans on Yugoslavia during Milošević's genocidal years. However warped and chauvinist the political culture is, it is a democratic one capable of popular change from ordinary people. This is what makes a total boycott appropriate; a total boycott aims at making the cost of apartheid so heavy to the voters of Israel that the policy is abandoned, as in South Africa.

A necessary alternative and exception are joint Israeli-Palestinian teams, such as this Australian Rules football team -- ironically named (you'll laugh, I promise) the Shimon Peres Peace Team. These endeavours are signs of what will be an inevitable process of reconciliation between the coloniser and the colonised, and thus potentially more important than even the marching together of North and South Korea at recent Olympic games. I think it's fitting that Aussie rules is helping to do this, with the sport being a hybrid of indigenous and colonial-settler sports and cultures (in the Koori game of marn grook, there was no scoring, for example, winners were chosen by consensus) and having fought its own battles over racism."

Craig Hickman said...


I'm with you on the history of Israel and the settlements. It simply can't be denied that Israel has expanded itself, against original international agreements, by will and force and bloodshed to take over Palestinian land.

I get that.

But the WTA rules and bylaws make no exception for soldiers moonlighting as tennis players, to use your construction. Pe'er would be entering Dubai as a tennis player, not as a soldier. And for that, her visa should not have been denied.

But since it was denied, the WTA should have canceled the event on the spot.

Graf_sampras said...

Hi Craighickman. thanks.

I also understand completely what you and others are saying about WTA "standing up" for the rules of the WTA and the player who is a memeber.

on THAT alone i even said many days ago in the other space here that it's unfortunate that DUBAI did that with Peer. and certainly i am aware and agree that "rules are rules".


people need to understand and remember. EVEN RULES are themselves human constructs.

even HUMAN rights are constructs. they do not come as a matter of what we all like to tell ourselves as "natural rights" .. they are only there as much as people are in agreement as to what things ARE -- such as "human rights" or "rules".

there is this particularly western and american view that is often stated in such banal ways "play by the rules". ...and YET this is a very example where "rules are to be followed" because for a WTA player -- these rules are sacrosanct -- and tournaments must follow THEM....

but what about the OTHER "rules" such as the RULE of a people honoring the "rights" of another people -- such as the people of the state of israel honoring the rights of the palestinians?

how is it that certain levels of "rule obedience" is OK -- because it can be "neutrally applied" regardless of the 'rules of politics' elsewhere , yet these rules themselves by the WTA actually -- when one thinks about it -- are based on the more fundamental issue of "rights" of humans, such as "the right of a player to play" --

BUT SUPPLANTS in THIS case the RIGHTS of PALESTINIANS to exist in decency - rather than be under the oppressive boots of Israel?

THAT is the connection here..which some of you try to DETACH - between the "rules of wta" and the RULES of HUMANITY..where it concerns Peer as a moonlighting SOLDIER of israel -- she is FIRST and ABOVE ALL a SOLDIER of israel and ONLY SECONDARILY a tennis player.

does it suddenly follow then -- that because she has discarded her garb as a soldier for the moment to play tennis and falls under the rules of the WTA -- that the rules of "human equality" between HERSELF and the palestinians are DISCARDED? and that therefore people and the WTA because of ITS rules -- can IGNORE the reality of where SHE comes from and what she, behind her "Tennisness" TRULY represents?

believe me -- i have had close friends of BOTH sides over the years...and years ago -- was even as vehement as I am today about the "right of israel to exist" ...but I can not abide this kind of double standard -- ESPECIALLY when a so-called "playing by the rules" of the WTA or these western-designed "Rules obeying" games and structures are applied - in essence - for their SUPPOSED neutrality -

on what is a fundamentally RIGGED system of "justice". : and THAT is

"the rules apply to everyone - such as the WTA says - SO LONG as POLITICAL statements can be made by the presence of someone that is the PREFERED political statement :

Israel GOOD, DUBAI/arabs BAD".

THAT"s what it amounts to. behind all these...and that is reflective of a HISTORICAL western point of view bias of "rules making". the reason i point out and expanded on other attendant issues of even much greater consequences such as the reality of the US EMPIRE that "does not speak its name" ....and its abetting the "little mideast Greater Zion" of israel's little neighborhood bully of an "empire"....

is because it is THESE very things that are consequential upon "rules" .

the points of view some of you have laid out -- are inherently "rules based" so long as they are seen from the point of view of a western dominated world view. THAT's the problem. some of you don't see that there is an ENTIRELY different point of view representing FAR MORE people on this planet than just the so-called "rules" presented from the western point of view.

and DUBAI is showing it, regardless of what else people think of dubai, islam, arabs, their culture, etc. etc.etc.

i will give you another example:

regarding IRAN for example:

the USA and the west do not want iran to have nuclear bombs, and from THAT "rule" which they themselves abrogate everywhere where it suits them (pakistan for example is/WAS ok with the USA to have ILLEGALLY created nuclear bombs as an "Ally", or so with INdia, or so with the UNDECLARED yet equally ILLEGAL ones by Israel because THEY represent tha) because these represent that "vanguards" of us/western imperialism or modern day version of their long histories of colonialism.

and YET TREATIES - RULES -- were signed BY the USA and IRAN decades ago for the non=nuclear proliferation act --

WHICH COUNTRY did no HONOR those? it is the USA! instead of diminishing its nuclear stockpile -- as REQURIED by the rules -- it INCREASED and modernized and even finds ways to "camouflage" them under different "new kinds of WMD's" such as "bunker busters" and "baby nuclear bombs"...while iran which protested - AND was isolated because it KICKED out the US PUPPET shaf of iran doing the bidding of the US oil conglomerates and corporations to pick up from where they left of in 1953 when THEY were kicked out by the democratically elected Mossadegh who insisted that IRAN's sovereignty was HERS as well as her riches and NOT for the US or england -- was in her turn surrounded and vilified by western and us imperialist propaganda , economic blockade (their usual tactic for countries that can't fight back from being exploited) -- etc etc etc.

WHERE WERE THE RULES then -- especially being claimed by the primary "rules follower" and MAKER country the USA?

out the window according to convenience.

so -- let us not PRETEND that this is REALLY about "rules" .

this is about POLITICS and what the western oriented thinking DECIDES is acceptable,. WTA or not.

and it is what i call HYPOCRISY of the first order.

let's not even talk about WTA Rules -- which are just a reflection of a point of view on "rules" by a section of the world that at THIS VERY MOMENT has abrogated ITS own rules where it suits it...such as

"ISRAEL can be a NUCLEAR POWER WITH BOMBS" - even if it has done so ILLEGALLY and is one reason it never wanted to sign the Treaties against nuclear proliferation --

BUT "iran can NOT be" even if it HAS honored the treaties for decades UNTIL the WEST decided to isolate it because the west was NOT HAPPY with which leaderships IRAN chose!

Graf_sampras said...

concerning what Baseliner said - abotu the bans on yugoslavia or what is left of it -- which is serbia proper --

are people REALLY aware of the true history of the current "serbia BAD- others GOOD?"

it is once again WESTERN imperialism playing games with "this buddy and NOT that enemy".

people look at serbia and her dictators such as milosevic as the "only ones" that were the aggressors -- when in reality -- croats and albanians in yugoslavia were EQUALLY culpable in committing atrocities not only against serbs but against each other - for purposes of "nationalism" WITHIN what were originally SERBIAN territory playing out THEIR affairs IN serbian territory.

and YET =why is it that serbia was BOMBED because of serbian "atrocities" against "ethnic albanians or croats?" by the USA under clinton and nato -- which THEMSELVES were warcrimes?

it was nothing LESS than a "slap in the face" TO RUSSIA -- because SERBIANS - ALWAYS have been traditionally fellow SLAVS of russians -- and to "render serbia" destroyed behind the big talk about "humanitarianism" was to tell russia in the 1990's


that's the same thing in the middle east - it is WESTERN , US LED imperialism and LUST for the riches and resources of the EAST. hiding behind big talk about "human rights" ..while at the same time imposing "rules" that are hypocritical that cause people in those regions where the WEST has NO BUSINESS poking its nose to suffer as a consequence.


Graf_sampras said...

I also want to clarify another "root" cause of the eventual destruction of yugoslavia resulting in the atrocities between serbs, croats and ethnic albanians.

people are perhaps not aware that there is in the history of eastern europe something called "GREATER ALBANIA?"

it is actually SIMILAR to what the israelis practice which is ZIONISM and "greater israel".

in which albanians from their little corner of the globe wanted an EXPANDED "greater albania" with some leaders in the 19th century imagining themselves to become an EMPIRE just like the Austro-hungarian empire ....

talk about delusions of grandeur ....

and as a result PUSHED populations INTO what was for centuries SERBIAN territory.

THAT is the true root of the "atrocities by serbs against albanians".

but according to the west in 1990 bombings of serbia --

noooooooooooooooooo ONLY the serbs are bad.!

but the HIDDEN motive was to "physically DETACH" ENTIRE provinces that REALLy belonged to serbia - after the breakup of yugoslavia (itself another scheme cooked up by US NATO "diplomacy" as according to the "divide and rule principle") -- and by this "show of influence" --

SHOW RUSSIA -- the traditional ethnic kin of serbs - "WHO'S BOSS" right NEXT DOOR to Russia --


now -- some of you -- consider this:

"IT IS SO UNFAIR -- that one country (russia) has ALL those rich resources....something ought to be done about it"...MAdeleine Albright US Secretary of STATE.

what is the CLEAR meaning?

connect with the 1990's when russia imploded and had no effective government trying to find its footing after gorbachev AGREED with reagan to dismantle the soviet union and the warsaw pact (which the USA PROMPTLY DISHONORED its own commitments) -- and the USA began to "build orange revolutions" around russia and BUILT UP NATO right next door to russia which was AGAINST the treaties!....

and you get the picture....

as has ALWAYS been since europe became the collection of "modern nation states" -- and behind it the "new global empire" USA --

THE WEST had ALWAYS lusted AFTER RUSSIA's RICHES! as a vanguard of the EAST part of the world.

so -- WHO HERE is REALLY trying to STEAL resources and lands from others?

it is NOT the east or their cultures -- it ALWAYS has been the WEST.

and the discussions about these israel and peer ARE among the consequences today!

more can be said about this western imperialism led by the USA -- which even a great US Marine General Smedley Butler revealed decades ago as
"The foreign policy of the USA has ALWAYS been geared towards gathering as much of the world';s resources unto ourselves --- at the expense of other weaker nations".

people need to be more HONEST when they even begin to profess offfense at how some ISRAELI TENNIS PLAYER is getting an UNJUST treatment by some tiny country with money that happens to have OIL that the west ALWAYS lusted after ! on the CHEAP too!

because people who say these things are reflecting a point of view of global order - based on nations (the west and their colonialisms) -- that does NOT put them in a position to even start to discuss these things with that kind of attitude of being offended by how peer is treated UNLESS they see why THIS is just a repercussion of FAR bigger issues than mere

Graf_sampras said...

and ya- i also want to be clear that for a tennis player -- PEER is one that i love to watch and would love for her to succeed on the strength of her tennis . for years i have always had an "eye" out for israeli players and was always excited when they would do well -- likely stemming from the common "love of israel" among people .

and YET there are truths behind the "realities" ...

and ONE of them is the political truth and reality behind the appearances of "injustice towards peer by dubai".......

it is the reality of the GREATER injustice by ISRAEL towards palestinians SO THAT PEER can travel around the world and BE a tennis player -- while people HER state oppresses and took land FROM -- can't even GET OUT OF THEIR OWN HOMES! nor even bury their dead properly because of ISRAEl's BOMBS and USA's tens of billions of dollars of "aid" to israel to MORE BOMBS!

i mean -- who is kidding whom ?

Graf_sampras said...

I'll put this notion of protesting or being offended by the treatment of Peer -- another way:

if people find that they can protest or feel offended about DUBAI excluding PEER....

and that "rules should be followed" as WTA says for neutrality...

they should have the courage to ALSO protest the TREATMENT of palestinians BY peer as a soldier and by HER zionist state...where RULES of order were NOT followed BY israel when it STOLE palestinian lands...and RULES of humanity are NOT followed by israel when she rains these "new and terrible" weapons upon populations who , in their DESpERATION launch rockets to israel that kill 13 israelis and THEN are COLLECTIVELY punishes to kill 1,300 palestinians!

people want to protest about Dubai and Peer exclusion? they should THEN protest the ROOT cause of that action and consequence and GO to their own GOVERNMENT -- the USA -- barack obama and the US PENTAGON and US Imperial, Military/industrial/congressional/corporate complex EISENHOWER warned americans AGAINST ....

if they really are THAT serious about "justice and rules"!

Graf_sampras said...

i have another tidbit for folks:

do you know that many of the products ISRAEL's industries SELLS in the united states , dairy products, clothes, shoes, bags, trinkets, etc -- are produced under what would and SHOULD be considered under SLAVE WAGES conditions -- done by palestinians? who are "allowed" during the day to be humiliated in checkpoints to enter israel to work for a pittance after their orchards and lands were stolen from them order to be "allowed" to BEHAVE like the SLAVES they really are meant to be BY ZION?

so MUCH for "justice" , eh?

if americans have TRULY any notion or conscience about THEIR own history and its history of enslavement and genocide of native indians to arrive at its prosperity and wealth and highsounding notions about 'democracy, liberty, justice' blah, blah, blah

they should have the MORAL and INTELLECTUAL courage and honesty to look at what their own government and culture THINKS is "a just israel" and what "justice" is in the WTA "rules". ..regarding Peer.

if anything THIS is a TRUE test of the american or western notions and proclamations and preaching about "justice and truth"..and how SELECTIVE they really have been ...


Graf_sampras said...

"It is still very unfortunate that due to the decision of the Dubai tournament and the UAE, I could not participate this year. This has hurt me significantly both personally and professionally.

"However, I am very happy for Andy Ram. I hope and believe that from this day forward, athletes from all over the world will be able to compete in the UAE and anywhere else in the world without discrimination of any kind."

"I welcome the decision just announced by the United Arab Emirates and the Dubai tournament to reverse a stance that until now has prevented Israeli athletes from competing in the UAE.

"This is a great victory for the principle that all athletes should be treated equally and without discrimination, regardless of gender, religion, race or nationality."

PEER SAYS...good for her. and i hope she competes in 2010.

BUT she might as well have said the FULL story:

by saying:

""It is still very unfortunate that due to the decision of the State of Israel and the USA and Western world, Palestinians could not live on their own lands and orchards which we took away from them. an so they could not prosper to produce a talented tennis player like me that i might face across the net in DUBAI in 2010... This has hurt Palestinians so significantly both personally and professionally, including their children and babies who we bomb to smithereens although you woudln't REALLY see those pictures in the new york times or CNN because they would be accused of being ANTISEMITIC.

"However, I am very happy for Andy Ram. I hope and believe that from this day forward, athletes from all over the world will be able to compete in the UAE and anywhere else in the world without discrimination of any kind....UNLIKE the way WE in Israel Discriminate against palestinians, starting with stealing their land from them and subjecting them to humiliating circumstances like the slaves that they really are to SERVICE US -- the great Israelis"

"I welcome the decision just announced by the United Arab Emirates and the Dubai tournament to reverse a stance that until now has prevented Israeli athletes from competing in the UAE. and I would welcome the decision by the State of israel to RETRUN land to the palestinians which really didn't belong to US anyway"

"This is a great victory for the principle that all athletes should be treated equally and without discrimination, regardless of gender, religion, race or nationality......EXCEPT of course where it concerns palestinians..with them it is OK for us to discriminate against them...after all -- they are only GOYIM....and we deserve THEIR land more than they there!!"

Graf_sampras said...

I also want to add another way of looking at it...and it has a very historical context:

Benjamin Franklin long ago warned the young United States:

"this country shall fall...not because of foreign enemies, real or shall fall because the people have become corrupt"..and he meant by that THIS:

"the nation that gives up liberties for the sake of security , no matter how temporarily, deserves neither security nor liberty:"

why do i post that? because , in principle it is related to this:

"THE WTA to uphold its RULES and neutrality for the sake of the "security of tennis" -- compromises itself by the VERY act of its insistence on the rules of neutrality -- for by those rules it has SUSPENDED the rules of humanity which have been under threat in Israel towards palestinians".

in other words -- where Benjmain Frankly CLEARLY said that PART of Liberty is the RISK of lack of security and that the latter MAY NOT overrule the liberty or both risk being lost together --

so should the ideas of JUSTICE NOT be suspended just because a tennis game is going on.

if justice is to be applied for tennis -- which the WTA insists is what its rules are all about -

then JUSTICE - with a capital J - needs to be applied to where israel from where peer comes - towards the palestinians....

to give up justice in ONE section for the sake of "justice" in another -- is to give up BOTH .

b said...

Graf_Sampras - Nice to read your commentary agreed on the perspective points - I'm very disappointed about Shahar's second letter condemning so many forms of discrimination - rings hollow - what about palestinian athletes, what about Arab and other non Jewish Israeli athletes. I like your amended letter.

I don't agree with the way she apparently found out last minute and everyone was put on the spot - that's it.

Quick note, I'm not Baseliner, that's someone different - I'm just plain "b"

Graf_sampras said...

sorry to b. for my wrongly guessing it stood for baseliner -- goes to show my "tennis addled" fanhood. lol.

but anyway - that is in fact the problem : her remark -- good as it was on its own merits is an example of how it is SO easy to have "outrage" and take offense at things when -- just on the other side of the door are much greater ones that a speaker that takes offense IS on the side of being responsible for.

this is the same as say george bush tlaking BIG about "democracy" or "accountability" or "we don't torture" -- "they are doing all that" as he points out things and others -- when , all along HE"s been a BIG doer of it all.

there is an article somewhere which describes this kind of thing so RAMPANT in american or western thought nowadays:

it is called "OUR culture of FAKE and MANUFACTURED outrage".

her picture appears on front pages as some kind of victim of injustice of mythic proportions....

but DOES the western world press put pictures of the DAILY deaths and maiming and suffering palestinians many of which probably felt the downside of Ms Peer's BOOTS? or heard HER Ordering them to LINE UP as those kids trembled at her sight like a StormTrooper?

on THEIR own land wrested from them where their great, great foreparents played in their orchards which were the sole or main source of their livehihoods but which Ms, Peer's fellow "miracle workers" uprooted , bulldozed and blew to kingdom come along with the futures and hopes of generations of palestinians?

"OUTRAGE at injustice" indeed!

Graf_sampras said...

there is in fact a difference between them,

this thing from Peer being offended or saddened - is hardly only about her being a tennis player "excluded" - nor is it only about WTA being "offended" or "Outraged" at her treatment by Dubai or dubai going against WTA rules (which another thing can be said about that : IF people can say DUbai , if it was going to go against a WTA rule, should NOT have applied for membership...well WTA should have KNOWN that arabs have a certain pride AND politically strong reason for eventualities such as THIS..and should have AVOIDED the temptation of MONEY that RICH OIL Country DUBAI offered....becaus where WTA and the west have "written rules" -- the arabs and the East have UNwritten rules! and they are as rightful to them as the written rules are to a western point of view, and probably of greater honor and import and firmness, which is something people DON"T seem to appreciate and IS the source of MUCH dissension, CONSIDERING that the "written rules-obsessed" western culture has OFTEN - more often than NOT, ABROGATED or NOT HONORED its OWN rules wherever it is it gives them NO position of authority or righteousness whatsoever to get takes TWO to tango) .

and the difference?

where people take offense but CHOOSE to ignore or be "ignorant of" or are under the wrong historical impressions of where the REAL and greate injustices lie - when people take offense at the treatment of Peer by dubai they are, imo, being RIGHTEOUS....

the REAL OUTRAGE should be directed at the injustices of peer's State that has LED to this kind of "exclusion" of peer BECAUSE of the "unwritten" rules of what the ARABS - sensitive to their brethren in gaza and palestine and the history of the THEFT of arab land by the people OF peer, aided and abetted by the USA and the west.

is NOT "ISRAEL" supposedly claimed to have created the "bible?"

is NOT the bible the repository of the "ten commandments" upon which the israelis stake their claim as a people and their claims on land, and the USA broadcasts itself self-righteously as a "christian nation?"

THEN --- put your actions where your mouths ARE:


becuse israel and the usa as "big bro and little bro" vis-a-vis the palestinians and arabs HAVE acted

AGAINST those very same laws they supposedly ABIDE BY!

that is hypocrisy 101. and the whole world is watching.

and this IS a case of "outrage" about peer's treatment by dubai coming likely from the western audience fed BY western media that propagates it worldwide for "copy" already PACKAGED as an "injustice against a Tennis player because she is israeli jew" -- IMPLYING "antisemitist injustice" --
which has ALWAYS been the propaganda worldwide along with "thou shalt not CRITICIZE israel or you shall be CONDEMNED as antisemitic" as the 11th commandment!! , lol ,

an example of what an american little known poet, i forget who, that quipped:

"we AMERICANs....we carefully nurture an attitude of detached indifference to the suffering of others.....even if WE are the cause of it".

and that applies to "outrage" directed at Dubai yet "carefully nurturing an attitude of detached indifference" to the suffering of

PALESTINIANS -- where the USA's OWN COMPLICITIES for their suffering - in the name of "our special relationship with Israel" !!!

it's pure baloney!