There was extensive coverage in the media of the recent Bahrain Grand Prix, and in particular the off-track events that surrounded it. The majority of this coverage suggested Formula One was there for financial reasons, despite the risk to team members’ lives and the overall political situation in the host country.

In response to this, many Formula One journalists stated there wasn’t actually any trouble in Bahrain at all; that even if you looked for it, you struggled to find the apparent riots and shootings.

But all this misses the point. Amnesty International recently released a reportwhich stated that 35 deaths were reported in Bahrain over a two-month period last year. Five of these were due to torture.

Why were the F1 press looking for riots when the true crimes of the rulers of Bahrain were hidden away, well out of the view of the public and the foreign press? The journalists in Bahrain should have illustrated their unease with the situation by discussing the Bahrainis who have been killed in the fight for their cause.

And the media should have looked at the bigger picture. As journalists, that’s their role. Formula One goes to many countries which have blemished human rights records. Many sports visit countries that murder, suppress and kill their citizens. The debate should be about whether it is right for these countries to be represented in international sport and whether these countries should be allowed to host international sport.

By answering these questions, I think we can begin to answer the great sport and politics divide. It should be right for Bahrainis to come to London to represent their country and fight for Olympic medals this summer. It’s right because it’s such a personal thing. Athletes dedicate their lives to doing the best they can in their chosen discipline. Most of the time they have nothing to do with politics.

So should it be right for Bahrain to host a grand prix? This is where the debate gets complicated.

Formula One ignored the rest of the world and went to South Africa in the 1980s during the apartheid. Was that right? Were other sports right to ignore the country? And does ignoring the country mean you’re ignoring its citizens and their plight?

Ultimately, by being in South Africa, Formula One put the spotlight on the country in a massive way. Rugby then went and finished the job by uniting the country with the 1995 World Cup.

That’s why Formula One was probably right to have gone to Bahrain. But, these are murky waters.

There are so many questions that surround the theatres of sport and politics, and they have been missed by the press in recent weeks. Great questions have been left unanswered when the recent Bahrain Grand Prix offered an opportunity for sensible answers to be found.

That’s the real shame from last weekend’s grand prix.

Source: Bleacher Report.

CONTINUED at The Telegraph.

*Taken from The Guardian.

Ivory Coast president Laurent Gbagbo has unleashed death squads on his opponents, with increasing numbers killed, kidnapped or raped, it was claimed today.

Guillaume Soro, a leading opposition figure, accused Gbagbo’s security forces of waging terror with the help of Liberian mercenaries.

“We’ve counted almost 200 dead and 1,000 wounded by gunfire, 40 disappearances and 732 arrests,” Soro said. “Worse, women have been beaten, stripped, assaulted and raped. When will the international community realise that a murderous insanity has begun in Ivory Coast?”

There was no official confirmation of Soro’s figures, but Amnesty International said it had received increasing reports of abductions, disappearances and physical abuse in the crisis-torn west African country.

Gbagbo has defied calls to step down after his election defeat by opposition leader Alassane Ouattara, putting the country at risk of violent unrest or even a new civil war.

Amnesty said it had evidence of people being arrested or abducted at home or on the streets, often by unidentified armed attackers accompanied by elements of the defence and security forces and militia groups.

Gendarmes and police officials are accused of attacking a mosque in Grand-Bassam, using live ammunition on crowds and of beating and groping female protesters.

Salvatore Saguès, Amnesty’s west Africa researcher, said: “It is clear that more and more people are being illegally detained by security forces or armed militiamen and we fear that many of them may have been killed or have disappeared.”

Many residents of the neighborhoods of Abobo, Adjamé, Treichville and Yopougon told Amnesty they cannot sleep at nights. One said: “When we see armed people in uniform or in plainclothes, we make noise with saucepans in order to alert our neighbours and to deter them.”

Amnesty said it has learned of numerous cases of people arrested by security forces or militiamen loyal to Gbagbo. The bodies of some have been found in morgues or on the streets. The whereabouts of many others remain unknown.

On the evening of 16 December, a few hours after a march organised by Ouattara supporters was violently suppressed by security forces, Drissa Yahou Ali and Konan Rochlin were kidnapped from their homes in Abidjan, according to Amnesty.

It reported a witness as saying said: “Around 7pm, a black Mercedes stopped in front of our compound. People wearing black T-shirts and military pants entered into the courtyard and asked for Drissa. They took him and Rochlin and went away.” Their bodies were found two days later in the Yopougon morgue.

The UN refugee agency said about 6,200 people had fled the violence. The US approved travel sanctions on Gbagbo and 30 of his allies and the west African regional bloc, Ecowas, said he should “yield power with dignity.”

The UN has certified Ouattara as the winner of the 28 November vote. Gbagbo has ordered the UN’s near 9,000 peacekeepers to leave immediately but the UN has refused to remove them.

Soro, who is Ouattara’s choice for prime minister, announced a campaign of disobedience. “We ask the brave and proud Ivorian people, in campgrounds, villages and cities to organise, mobilise and protest by all means possible until Mr Laurent Gbagbo’s departure from power,” he said.

My Two Cents: Why’s everyone sweating this waterboarding thing? I get waterboarded all the time in an effort to spice up my sex life. Funny how Amnesty International wants to prosecute Bush but there is no mention of prosecuting the terrorists who have tortured people. Priorities assholes, priorities. Besides, Gitmo detainees get free ice cream daily. Sounds like a fair trade off. End Two Cents.

*Taken from Reuters.

(Reuters) – The United States must prosecute former President George W. Bush for torture if his admission in a memoir that he authorized waterboarding holds true, rights group Amnesty International said on Wednesday.

In “Decision Points,” published this week, Bush defended his decision to authorize waterboarding, a form of simulated drowning condemned by some as torture.

Bush said the practice was limited to three detainees and led to intelligence breakthroughs that thwarted attacks and saved lives. He told NBC in an interview to publicize the book that his legal adviser had told him it did “not fall within the anti-torture act.”

Amnesty International’s Senior Director Claudio Cordone said in a statement: “Under international law, anyone involved in torture must be brought to justice, and that does not exclude former President George W. Bush.

“If his admission is substantiated, the U.S.A. has the obligation to prosecute him,” he said. “In the absence of a U.S. investigation, other states must step in and carry out such an investigation themselves.”

Waterboarding was banned by Bush’s successor, President Barack Obama, shortly after he took office in 2009.

Interrogators are now required to follow interrogation guidelines laid out in the U.S. Army Field Manual, which excludes the practice.

Bush wrote that waterboarding was first approved for Abu Zubaydah, an al Qaeda figure arrested in Pakistan in 2002 who was suspected of involvement in a plot to attack Los Angeles International Airport.

When Abu Zubaydah stopped answering questions from the FBI, CIA Director George Tenet told Bush he thought the detainee had more information to offer.

Bush wrote that there were two techniques, which he did not describe, that he felt went too far even though they were legal and he ordered that they not be used. But he approved the use of waterboarding.

“No doubt the procedure was tough, but medical experts assured the CIA that it did no lasting harm,” he wrote.