Lockdown in London: Ex-U.S. Athlete Jules Boykoff on Olympic Censorship and Militarization

[Lars77]

DemocracyNow.org - Britain has launched its biggest peacetime security operation ever ahead of the opening of the Summer Olympics. Nearly 20,000 armed forces personnel are now providing security -- almost double the number of British troops currently serving in Afghanistan. The Olympic Games are estimated to cost British taxpayers a staggering $17 billion. At the same time, Brits near the Olympic Park have been subjected to sweeping censorship laws enacted by their government at the behest of the International Olympic Committee. Meanwhile, activists are outraged that the Olympics' long list of sponsors include companies, such as Dow Chemicals and BP. They say the corporations' human rights records are at odds with the Olympic ideals of global peace and goodwill. We go to London to speak with Jules Boykoff, a professor and author who is currently writing a book on dissent and the Olympics. He played for the U.S. Olympic soccer team in international competition from 1989-1991.

To watch the complete weekday independent news hour, read the transcript, download the podcast, search our vast archive, or to find more information about Democracy Now! and Amy Goodman, visit http://www.democracynow.org/

[freshwest]

1. Will the royal family make an appearance? This seems to be a situation ripe for takeover.

By the military and shutting down Parliament or some other outrage. It's hard to believe they need 20K troops, missiles, etc..

Or is this a reaction to the rioting going on last year? Are they expecting all out violence from the citizenry?

This seems like overkill. Anyone who knows, please explain.

[Lars77]

2. It might be a signal to any potential rioters to not try anything

The British establishment can be very oppressive when they want to.

[freshwest]

3. Is there any serious threat to the maintenance of the government? Wow, missiles on roof tops!

That was probably the most bizarre part of this whole set-up. It would seem they would announce there was a terrorist threat of some kind in the offing, to make the public agree. I have not heard one thing in the media about WHY they did that.

It doesn't even sound practical. You don't fire missiles inside of cities unless you're at war. They returned fire in WW2 at the German planes bombing them, so it's not like London was never attacked or had to defend itself. There is no such threat.

And you don't play wargames just anywhere, it dangerous and things can go wrong. Who would they aim at in such a crowded location, what in the world do they expect?

[Lars77]

4. Well i suppose the missiles are surface to air missiles

In case there's a 9/11 type situation.

But the Brits have had the IRA to deal with long before any muslim extremists started blowing stuff up, and then they had a ferocious attack in London not long ago you might remember.

I think the British are used to living under a lot of surveillance. London was already the most monitored city in the world i think, with cameras all over the place with automatic face recognition technology and stuff.

But it's probably also a deterrent against social unrest. They have a long tradition for public protest and unrest in that country and it is still very much a class divided society where it all depends on what background you have, what school you went to etc.

[freshwest]

5. Just wondering who they expect to enter their airspace? 7/7 was not an aerial attack; 9/11 was...

Carried out with domestic airplanes. If they shot down a plane or any kind, even a drone, helicopter, etc. it might make sense, but the distances within the city, with skyscrapers, etc., it will be a disaster if they miss the target. The last attack in Munich was carried out by gunmen years ago. This sounds like an accident waiting to happen with all that firepower. Maybe someone in the RAF could explain, or has heard an explanation.