...2010? Will South Africa have sorted out its problems by 2010. Will people visiting the country to see the World cup.... walk into a mass orgy of theft, carnage, rape etc. Or will SA have grown into a proud, graceful and respectful host country?
My family in law and friends are quite keen and excited to come down in 2010 for the world cup. I am a hypocrite because I jump immediately to the defence of South Africa when they express an opinion or judgement? but at the same time feel very uneasy about brining them down there. They have not got the slightest sense of danger and would not recognise it till it is too late. For example. In Germany, it is quite normal for motorists to be confronted by a pedestrian asking for directions and visa-versa! My husband would roll down the window without a second thought. People often say that one should simply inform them of the dangers. One can?t cover everything. How does one instil the natural instincts of a South African into a foreigner?
If things continue the way they are, FIFA will move the cup elsewhere.
The good news in this is that, if it happens, any soccer hooligans from Europe are in for a rude awakening. I doubt they've ever had AK47s pointed at them.
This article appeared in the newspapers which I fully support
Soccer is growing apace Down Under and the stadiums can be ready in time to host its most prestigious competition ? an event that far surpasses cricket?s current version, which has been spoilt by long-windedness and prices fixed for a supposed influx of westerners and not for the local market. Cricket has been overtaken by greed and frankly is not worth bothering about.
Some argue that sport and politics must be kept apart. Boycotts have become another weapon in the political armoury. However the ANC will not complain about them. Indeed they argued strongly in favour of them whilst they and the PAC and the progressives and the world community were trying to bring apartheid to its knees. Presented with the current barbarism in Zimbabwe they will surely agree that sporting links must be broken. But why stop with Zimbabwe? Why not widen responsibility to those helping Mugabe retain power?
President Mbeki and his cohorts must accept some of the blame for a viciousness designed to keep a sick and spiteful old man in power, and the nasty CIO in clover, but presented under a thin veneer of anti-colonial conduct. Doubtless our leader is contemplating some distant vision of an African renaissance but meanwhile millions are dying or fleeing and a fine country is turning into a cesspit.
Mugabe has run rings round his younger ally yet South Africa?s influence is apparent. Was not the date of Mugabe?s rigged re-election changed partly because the original date would have clashed with the World Cup? It is inconceivable that a soccer tournament can be played with such wickedness unfolding a short distance away, on the watch of the very nation that has been given the honour of staging the event.
Mbeki?s discreet diplomacy has been a devastating failure. Overseas he is regarded as an apologist for his friend in Harare, and his reputation has not survived this association. The common person came to him and was met with aristocratic disdain. It is not enough to say that Zimbabwe?s pain is shared.
No, the only course of action available to the rest of the world is to take the World Cup away from South Africa. Otherwise the grim prospect will be faced of Zimbabweans being forced back across Beit Bridge to face further savagery even as Brazil and France play the beautiful game in a well-furnished stadium. It is situation intolerable to those who care more about humanity than political theory, those who refuse to be misled by silver tongues and demagoguery. It is a state of affairs inconceivable to those who care about sport
You will nevr educate the civilised into understanding the uncivilised - only warn them. Let your Husband have a look at this site evry day for a few weeks and he may change:
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
There have been many questions like this already and all valid!
The 2010 Wcup has the potential to backfire on the country and may cause more harm than good owing to the after effects of bad publicity.
However it seems that there are more than enough people willing to make a quick buck while gambling on the safety of tourists and the future of S.A. beyond 2010.
Virtually nothing is being done to combat crime in South Africa, it almost seems as though the government is relying on the morality of the criminals to not tarnish the image of South Africa during the Wcup!?
One would therefore think that we have a moral responsibility to educate tourists about how to keep safe during their visit, after all, we may not realise it but our social environment is different to what others may be used to.
In addition, South Africans usually know what they can or can´t do in certain places and situations, however to presume that the tourists may know as well may be short sighted.
I do not see any steps in this direction and certainly no talk of a moral responsibility.
Anyway, I do hope that the people who need to benefit from it will, but I have serious misgivings about this too.
Usually in events of this scale the tax payer ends up footing most of the bill - and that´s in 1st world countries!
04-30-2007, 05:07 AM
Sponsored Links 
Linear Mode
Similar Threads 
