I am annoyed that I did not mention a few days ago how the International Olympic Committee will respond to the ethics complaint against its finance chief Ser Miang Ng. Unfortunately, it got lost in the rush to produce the newsletter:
Jens Weinreich
Jens Weinreich
Of course, it was to be expected that the IOC would eventually claim that Ser Miang Ng had disclosed his conflicts of interest – some kind of propaganda blah blah blah.
- Of course, no evidence have been presented.
- Of course, this has been the IOC's modus operandi for decades whenever a leading member comes under fire for hair-raising conflicts of interest – it was no different in the case of Thomas Bach, the multiple lobbyist, with Siemens (among others).
- Of course, Ser Miang Ng and the IOC could have made these claims and provided evidence some time ago – for example, after receiving the ethics complaint in June or in response to my detailed enquiry a week ago. (Read my questions and the stupid verbal manoeuvres that replaced the answers.)
- Of course, they didn't. Instead, other media outlets that inquired with the IOC after my exclusive publication were fed statements claiming, without any evidence, that everything was above board, that the reporting was exaggerated, and that the ethics complaint was baseless due to clear conflicts of interest and obvious corruption.
That's how it works at the IOC.
The media then parrot the propaganda.
None of this can be taken seriously. It's disgusting.
But it can be effective because there are hardly any media outlets left that investigate this area. The Olympic family's business is not only a partially lawless area; more than 99 per cent of the media are failing to do their job – as readers and subscribers to this newsletter, you enjoy the products of one of the few media exceptions worldwide; the focus here is precisely on the dubious Olympic business.
Following my publications this week, which were received with great interest in Olympic circles, the quasi-state-owned CNA (Channel NewsAsia), which is owned by a Singapore government investment company, asked the IOC for clarification. At least that's something. I will not link to the article, of course, as CNA has not linked to me either. Here is a quote:
