Jump to content

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Quaker2001 said:

Doesn't the IOC charter also specify that the ceremonies must be in the host city? 

Well, they've fudged that one.  Obviously, it's the larger metropolitan aggregation.  You can't hold cities to just up and move the main stadium to fall within the "city limits."  Or similarly, they could ask the main city and the suburb to change borders for one night -- in order to fulfill that "stipulation" in an utterly silly way.  (WHich is what I had proposed when NYC was bidding and they had to use Meadowlands for Oly stadium.  

Please, folks.  common sense. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 4.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

The thing you LA boosters just can't seem to understand is that the IOC only cares about what the host city will do for "the Olympic movement." The sports federations are not interested in urban devel

Sigh! I've tried not to get too involved in the tit-for-tatting in the whole LA debate. And tried to give you the benefit of the doubt and allow that you're a passionate and blinkered supporter of LA

I am struck by the statement that "there is no reason to attack LA." There is no reason to attack any city or any people in any city. This is the horror of terrorism. Whichever city wins any Olympi

RuFF would have us believe the geniuses at LA24 are winning by doing nothing whilst everything Paris does is implicitly shooting itself in the foot.

In fact, it's not true. LA is doing a very similar thing but spreading it over 20 days rather than two...

https://la24.org/media/620-2020-launch

A marathon rather than a sprint.

Besides, I think RuFF is lost in a web of his own thoughts now. When he believed Paris was trying to paint a negative picture of LA re: the Facebook likes SCANDAL it was terrible, bad form, un-Olympic. Now he thinks LA's whole 'strategy' is to paint Paris in a bad light, of course that's fine. In truth, the Facebook thing was the most boring scandal in the history of scandals*, and on Olympic Day both bids are launching activities. Things are so much simpler when you take off the tin foil hat!

* EDIT: No, I'm wrong about that. The faux-outrage when Paris 2024 had the temerity to ask its Twitter followers to post pictures of Paris in the sun (©Los Angeles 2024) was the most boring scandal. I still can't believe this website posted a whole article about that! The Facebook likes thing comes in second.

Edited by Rob.
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Incidentally, LA's website is shite. Have to wait ages for that angel logo to disappear, and the up-down arrows on my keyboard that I use to scroll have been commandeered to shuffle between pages! Never mind basic rules of accessibility eh?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's always funny when all of PuFF's contradictions, hypocrisy & double standards are pointed out. But of course the tin foil hat wearer (& her main cohort 'groupie') never see(s) it that way of course lol.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

And here's another "key" point about L.A.'s "verbiage" - when Casey Wasserman IS being very presumptuous when "telling" the IOC that in essence L.A. should go "first" (when speaking about the double-award) in order to "stabilize the Olympic world". And that if it doesn't, that their plan will just outright *poof* disappear for 2028 (setting his own "ultimatum"). But of course, the double-standards of that totally allude you since you're "unable to see the tip of your own (hypocritical pink) nose". :P

Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, FYI said:

And here's another "key" point about L.A.'s "verbiage" - when Casey Wasserman IS being very presumptuous when "telling" the IOC that in essence L.A. should go "first" (when speaking about the double-award) in order to "stabilize the Olympic world". And that if it doesn't, that their plan will just outright *poof* disappear for 2028 (setting his own "ultimatum"). But of course, the double-standards of that totally allude you since you're "unable to see the tip of your own (hypocritical pink) nose". :P

Or how, in the same defense Puff use Garcetti's words - "Paris is more of the same" as a positive light, when it can also be interpretated as arrogance and ultimatum while dismissing the competition.  But hey, maybe it's just lost in translation. And like you said, Casey is also good using verbiage threads so no one is here innocent.

Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, RuFF said:

Well, I'm glad the topic of your conversations is me, and not the subject matter. :)

Anyhow, key points of the LA verbiage. 

Paris is "more of the same." - Mayor Eric Garcetti

“Even when the issue of a dual award for the 2024 and 2028 Games was initially raised, we didn’t say it’s ‘LA first’ or it’s ‘now or never’ for LA: that sounds like an ultimatum. We could have used that strategy, but we didn’t because we thought it was presumptuous to tell the IOC what to do and how to think. We’re better partners than that." - Casey Wasserman.

So while everyone else is reading a concession I guess I'm the only one reading that Casey was saying Paris is a poor partner that will throw ultimatums. All without using those words and painting LA in a positive light in the same stroke. 

So yea Rob, you would have everyone think I am thinking something to further your own narrative which kind of veered from what I was actually talking about. I think it's pretty clear. 

Oh Joseph.. well, when you troll that hard, it'll happen.  Shame on the rest of us for falling into the trap.

Not worth debating this with you anymore.  You hear only what you want to hear, do your best to twist anything into a narrative that fits your position, and then tell us that we're the ones who aren't seeing clearly.  You know what you are.  Everyone else knows it here.  Just go away and save it for someone who actually gives 2 shits.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, RuFF said:

The problem Quaker is that you are guilty of doing exactly what you are accusing me of. So please, save your breath. Get over addressing me directly and instead focus on your own observations. 

Easier to do that when you're not here splattering your diarrhea all over the place.  This thread smells like feces when you're around.

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, RuFF said:

1f4a9.png1f4a9.png1f4a9.png1f4a9.png1f4a9.png1f4a9.png

No, Joseph.  I want to hear other people give constructive opinions and have intelligent thoughts (which you offer none of), even if their viewpoints disagree with my own.  That's what makes for interesting discussion.  You apparently want this thread to be a safe space where only people who agree with you are allowed to post and - heaven for-fucking-bid - someone has a unique thought needs to go to another thread.  Way to represent for millennials!

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/27/2017 at 2:00 PM, FYI said:

You don't have to be sold on it. It's the IOC that does. And it very well looks that they're gonna buy that idea.

You keep telling yourself that, you just might believe it. That's why Garcetti & Wasserman are becoming more & more open to 2028 with each passing day (you've even said so yourself with "L.A.'s willingness to be more adaptive than Paris is").

Uh huh.

L.A. has the money? But what about the "cost-effectiveness" that L.A. keeps touting then? Kinda blows that "idea" outta the water then if L.A. now wants to go all out Beijing/Sochi-style cuz they have the "money".

And no other real issues? What about the purple line extention that Garcetti now wants to ask the Feds for more "money" on it to speed up it's progress, in particular with a 2024 timetable. Sounds to me that's a real issue to contend with. Not to mention the Coliseum overlay that will also cost time, money & energy to get done for the Games.

The funding in question for the Purple Line acceleration project is something that Phil Washington had previously stated saying 2035 was too long of a wait for a finished line, namely because of the rate at which funding would be allocated and distributed.

When Metro & Garcetti asked for the funding it was taking advantage of a pilot program by the FTA. Basically the Feds would match whatever was collected by the local measure. Under Obama this was a non issue, under Trump it became questionable, but, the most recent news points to LA getting the grant even without an Olympic win.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, RuFF said:

Funny part is that this is exactly what it's about. You only want to hear your own voice and affirmations. So of course it's a lot easier when I'm not around. That's why you're better suited for the Paris thread.

LMFAO, I thought this can't be more "bizarre"...

No Puff. With the exception of your blogger Abrahamson (Which besides he has been discredited as a journalist by other more respected people) no one of your "arguments" has been sustained in the reality and the irony of that, everything you said came in the opposite direction. 

Now, without using clear insults or fake jokes as an attack when you feel cornered (Which deserves a recognition btw), now you try to use "my opinion" which can be understandable if it wasn't a posterior meaning of "my opinion" to "real facts" without other sustainable evidences. At this point, as the links I posted early, this isn't just Quaker, FYI, Rob, baron or me being antagonists of your hypothetical vision, but also it's a considerable part of the international press, some of the local government representatives and even international organizations. Unless this antagonism is also representative as "the world against me", that previous point of "You only want to hear your own voice and affirmations" is dead and no valid beyond emotional wrath.

In that aspect, my perception (And I repeat, this is my perception), you didn't posted because there wasn't a potential alternative fact, twisted point or repeat lie to use as argument. Maybe i'm mising a piece of the picture because i'm not psychologist but anyway...

At the end, it's not like "it's easier controlling when I wasn't around", because... well, the evidences said otherwise. If somehow you do the classic joke/insult, this is the classic Puff...

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Quaker2001 said:

So this Mt. SAC (which is NOT in SACramento) has dorms for over 2,800 athletes, coaches, officials and judges who will compete at the Trials?  Wow.  And this is just a community college.  Or will they be housed at the larger Cal-Poly-Pomona campus?? 

Edited by baron-pierreIV
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, baron-pierreIV said:

So this Mt. SAC (which is NOT in SACramento) has dorms for over 2,400 athletes who will compete at the Trials?  Wow.  And this is just a community college.  Or will they be housed at the larger Cal-Poly-Pomona campus?? 

"This Mt. SAC" is Mount San Antonio College.  No, it's not in San Antonio either.  USATF wanted the LA media market rather than Eugene.  By the summer of 2020, LA is likely a future Olympic host, so why not.  Don't know where the athletes will be housed, but perhaps it will be at Cal Poly Pomona (which IS in Pomona)

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, RuFF said:

Holy Jibberish Batman! Of course, the international press. Duh.. the same one that gave Paris the front runner status for 2012. Wonk wonk. 

How selective amnesia Batman. Under that stage, London was actually stealing spotlight for doing exactly what Paris is currently. Just for episodes like Chirac's Finnish food or Tony Blair's incredible charm drooling over the voters with his English/French language abbilities. Paris had the best technical bid, but the emotive pres was in London as making waves.

This time is different, because in this time, the charming and young represenrative who speaks English/French is in the French line and the emotional sell is over Paris atm. Emotion sells, like the emotive narratives of Rio and London.

But we can't be surprisex for your selective amnesia anymore.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

23 minutes ago, RuFF said:

Holy Jibberish Batman! Of course, the international press. Duh.. the same one that gave Paris the front runner status for 2012. Wonk wonk. 

WOW, the short-sightedness & total naiveness (or just plain L.A. blindness in your case) in that comparison! 

Paris 2012 was in a race against a MEGA-field of other EUROPEAN capitals, not to mention NYC, where Paris' closest main challenger, London 2012 was making strides in their campaign like Paris 2024 is now. Los Angeles doesn't even compare in such an equation this time around.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Quaker2001 said:

You apparently want this thread to be a safe space where only people who agree with you are allowed to post and - heaven for-fucking-bid - someone has a unique thought needs to go to another thread.  Way to represent for millennials!

Exactly - this thread is NOT meant to be a "save haven" for all of PuFF's (& the rest of her L.A. "groupies") L.A. hyperbole rhetoric. But rather to discuss all of the pros AND cons of such bids (& like we've done with so many other bids here on GB's throughout the years). 

Like I've said before, if she wants a "safe place" where all of her gibberish isn't challenged, then she needs to do her own instragram page or blog or whatever, & do all her sh!t over there. Or better yet, she can just go to AbraTrollson's "blog", along with the other "L.A. ra ra gurlz", & they can bump L.A. twats all they want over there. :lol:

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, FYI said:

 

WOW, the short-sightedness & total naiveness (or just plain L.A. blindness in your case) in that comparison! 

Paris 2012 was in a race against a MEGA-field of other EUROPEAN capitals, not to mention NYC, where Paris' closest main challenger, London 2012 was making strides in their campaign like Paris 2024 is now. Los Angeles doesn't even compare in such an equation this time around.

And still Paris lost with only 4 votes in that race, which mentioned as a reason how the emotional message of London was key in this last stage of campaign, which it's currently happening with Paris. It may be, perhaps, the same mastermind and team behind London and Rio campaigns are currently doing that with Paris.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, RuFF said:

Oooh oooh. PuFF said something very short-sighted, non-objective & just down-right stupid, as usual. Glad others corrected my blunders! Lol

Exactly. 

1 hour ago, Roger87 said:

Funny you are returning to classic comments without making realistic counter arguments.

Yep - classic case of when their feeble arguments are popped like a balloon. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

oh boy....ruff speaks and they are triggered......responses are immediate....people are hovering over their phone to see if "he"will post.....and they must immediately respond. .....of course someone will be called a twat, another will write a long paragraph of hilariously and strangely combined english words...........

...everyone knows Paris will win 24 but there is still a viscous sensitivity for any other thought.......god knows why......how can Paris not win at this point?

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Oh boy", puff gets called out for his usual hypocritical, condescending twaddle, &  pauls defensive response is immediate. Hovering over his phone to see if he must "immediately" come to puffs (& L.A.'s) "rescue" with a long paragraph of hilariously & strangely combined English words.

Everyone knows that L.A. will likely get "an" Olympics at this point, but there is still a "viscious" sensativity (on their part) for any other thought if it's not in '24 (even though puff has said that he's "fine" with '28 now). :rolleyes:

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, paul said:

oh boy....ruff speaks and they are triggered......responses are immediate....people are hovering over their phone to see if "he"will post.....and they must immediately respond. .....of course someone will be called a twat, another will write a long paragraph of hilariously and strangely combined english words...........

...everyone knows Paris will win 24 but there is still a viscous sensitivity for any other thought.......god knows why......how can Paris not win at this point?

1341516301973_2860722.png

No paul, as much as this site is not exactly known for good-hearted debate and being open to other opinions, there's a vicious sensitivity for posters being douchey asshole trolls and spreading their bullshit all over the place.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are NO longer talking about the "perceived positives" about L.A.'s bid when your latest "sqauwks" are how L.A.'s "verbiage" is to paint Paris 2024 in a "negative light". So you're so full of it.

And far as the rest of your "obnoxious" & "viscious" post, it's a complete joke, just like the rest of your entire post history here.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...