The Problems During Rio's Summer Olympics 2016

The Problems During Rio's Summer Olympics 2016

The country is a disaster.

The 2016 Summer Olympic games in Rio De Janeiro have begun!

Athletes from all over the world, who've trained and competed intensely to earn a position to represent their country are all gathered in this exotic country.

The Olympic games is to host international friendly competition through multiple-sport categories.The Olympics also symbolizes as a union for the world to come together to celebrate and amicably.

Brazil is the first country in South America to host the Olympics.

Though, this is how the Olympics are defined and suppose to be, it does not configure how international order has been set in 2016.There are factors that have a possible effect during the course of the Olympic games.

On September 7, 2007, Brazil submitted as an Applicant city to the International Olympic Committee [IOC] for the Summer Olympics in 2016. In 2009, Brazil won, having nearly a decade for preparations as the host.

Economic crisis

Since then there were a continuation economic crisis and facility problems. Brazil has been going through a recession since 2011. Budget cuts have lead to facilities for the games to be on hiatus. Before losing its value in the international markets, Brazil was having solid growth. The IOC had to search for various ways to reduce the overall cost to Rio, which includes catering, transportation, and other additional necessities like a hospital. Keep aware there will be economic reports that will affect during the Olympic Games. Also, there is huge concerns of the polluted waters in Rio.

Protests in Rio

The Olympics games being a unification and traditional event, the host for the games always tries to show the countries culture and pride as an on-going theme for Olympic ceremonies. Unfortunately, the citizens of Brazil have been on protest the past few months with their government with the overall billions spent for the sporting event and the corruption from their politicians.So far, the protests have not been led to an act of violence, but should be a concern as the nation’s population is unhappy and angry.

Brazil’s President leading to impeachment

President Dilma Rousseff is on the verge of impeachment, due to tampering public funds to cover budget gaps and a huge corruption scandal involving state-run oil company Petrobras. A committee in Brazil’s Federal Senate have agreed for an impeachment trial against Pres. Rousseff. She's also a role player to the adjustment of the economic collapse.Once criticized political opponents on higher taxes and budget cuts on the country’s economic stability, she contradicted herself leading her country in poverty.There has always been scandals and corruptions in Brazil, but being the nation’s political leader, while going through a political crisis during a time where people all over the world are attending and being televised plays a factor.

Crisis with Zika

As it has been known to the public, there has been extreme caution of the Zika virus. In 2015, an outbreak began in Brazil. Zika virus can be transmitted from infected impregnated women to her fetus that can cause birth defects and neurological problems.There are other side effects like muscle weakness and the nervous system to adults through sexual intercourse.Brazil having one of the most and major outbreaks, it’s concerning for visitors like other nation’s athletes, officials, and tourists coming to Rio. The mass amount of diverse people arriving, this can lead to transporting the virus back to their home nations if infected.

The Olympics secured?

Last month, there were speculations with police officers in Rio that they haven’t been paid in months and has been stated by officers they won’t be reliable on tourists’ safety. According to Numbeo, Rio's crime rate is at a level of 90.33 percent. The Rio De Janeiro state, they control the region's military police force had to issue an executive order for emergency funds (estimated $850 million) from their federal government to compensate officers. With the Olympic games underway, Rio had to enlist police officers to all competition venues and to be in high security alert. A private security company was so supposed to prioritize the safety and protection during the games but bailed out in the last moments prior to Olympic openings.It will be cautious with the high level of crime during these games.

The factors that have been shared are all going to determine the circumstances surrounding the 2016 Summer Olympic games.So forth for the event, let’s hope for positive results, be aware and have an understanding with the turmoil that is happening within Brazil.

Cover Image Credit: Rio Olympics 2016

Popular Right Now

Connect with a generation
of new voices.

We are students, thinkers, influencers, and communities sharing our ideas with the world. Join our platform to create and discover content that actually matters to you.

Learn more Start Creating

Ilhan Omar Is at Best Foolhardy and at Worst, Yes, Anti-Semitic

Her latest statements seem to lack substance, motivation, or direction.


I find the case of Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) to be a curious one.

Specifically, I am referring to the recent controversy over select comments of hers that have generated accusations of anti-Semitism. In all honesty, prior to doing research for this article, I was prepared to come to her defense.

When her comments consisted primarily of "Israeli hypnosis" and monied interest, I thought her wording poor, though not too egregiously deviated from that of most politicians in the current climate of bad behavior. After all, Israeli PACs surely do have a monied interest in the orientation of United States policy in the Middle East. Besides, if President Trump can hypothesize about killing someone in broad daylight and receive no official sanction, I don't see the need for the House of Representatives to hand down reprimand to Rep. Omar for simply saying that Israel may have dealt wrongly, regardless of the veracity of that position.

And yet, seemingly discontent that she had not drawn enough ire, Omar continued firing. She questioned the purported dual loyalty of those Americans who support the state of Israel, while also making claim that the beloved former President Obama is actually not all that different from the reviled current President Trump.

In short, the initial (mostly) innocuous statements about the United States' relation with Israel have been supplanted by increasingly bizarre (and unnecessary) postulations.

Those latest two controversies I find most egregious. Questioning the loyalty of an American citizen for espousing support for a heavily persecuted world religion and in defense of a refuge for practitioners of that self-same religion that has existed as an independent state since 1948, seems, in really no uncertain terms, anti-Semitic.

After all, is it not her own party that so adamantly supports persecuted Palestinians in the very same region? Is it not she and fellow Muslim Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) (who is not without her own streak of anti-Semitic controversy) that have rejected challenges to their own loyalty in being ethnically Somali and Palestinian respectively? Is her claim not akin to the "racist" demands that Obama produce proof of his birth in the United States, and the more concrete racism that asserted he truly was not? And (if you care to reach back so far) can her statement not be equated to suggestions that President John F. Kennedy would be beholden to the Vatican as the first (and to date only) Catholic to hold the presidency?

From what I can discern amongst her commentary, in Omar's mind, the rules that apply to her framework on race, ethnicity, religion, and culture as sacred idols above reproach do not extend to her Jewish contemporaries.

Oh, and may I remind you that over 70% of Jewish Americans voted for Hilary Clinton in 2016.

And yet, beyond even this hypocrisy, is the strange disdain Omar suddenly seems to hold for Barack Obama. Even as a non-Democrat, while I can find reason for this, it is still largely perplexing.

To begin with, I recognize that Ilhan Omar is not your prototypical Democrat. She would scoff at being termed a moderate, and likely would do the same to being labeled a traditional liberal. While she doesn't identify as an outright democratic socialist, one would have to be totally clueless to avoid putting her in the company of those who do, such as Tlaib or Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY).

As such, she's bound to have some critical evaluations of President Obama, despite the lionizing that the Democratic establishment has and continues to engage in. Two points still stick out to me as obvious incongruities in her statement, however.

First, Obama and Trump are nothing alike. Again, this coming from someone who does not regularly support either, I can at least attempt to claim objectivity. While Obama might not have been faithful to all the demands of the far-left during his presidency, his position on the political spectrum was far from the extreme bent that Trump has ventured into.

Secondly, there is the style of the two men to consider. While Obama had his share of goofs and gaffes (I still think it somewhat juvenile that he often refused to say "radical Islamic terrorism" when referring to Islamist extremists) he pales in comparison to Trump. Every week Trump has his foot caught in a new bear trap. Obama is enormously tame in comparison.

And in addition to all of that, one must beg the question of Omar's timing. With Republicans emboldened by her controversies and House Democratic leadership attempting to soothe the masses, why would Omar strike out at what's largely a popular figure for those that support her most? There seemed no motivation for the commentary and no salient reasoning to back it up, save that Omar wanted to speak her mind.

Such tactlessness is something that'll get you politically killed.

I do not believe Barack Obama was a great president, but that's not entirely important. I don't live in Ilhan Omar's district; her constituents believe Obama was a great president, and that should at least factor into her considerations. Or maybe she did weigh the negative value of such backlash and decided it wouldn't matter? 2019 isn't an election year, after all. Yet, even if that's the case, what's to gain by pissing off your superiors when they're already pissed off at you?

You need to pick your battles wisely in order to win the war, and I'm highly doubtful Omar will win any wars by pitching scorched-earth tactics over such minute concerns.

Her attitude reminds me not only of that of some of her colleagues engaging obtusely and unwisely over subjects that could best be shrugged off (see the AOC media controversies), but also some of my own acquaintances. They believe not only in the myth of their own infallibility, but the opposition bogeyman conjured by their status in a minority or marginalized group. As the logic goes, "I'm a member of x group, and being so gives me the right to decimate anyone who has any inclination to stand against me in any capacity, tit for tat." So much for civility.

I initially came here to defend Rep. Ilhan Omar, and I still do hold to that in certain cases. The opposition to some of her positions is unwarranted. She is allotted the freedom of speech, as are all Americans.

And yet, in certain other cases she has conducted herself brashly, and, one could argue, anti-Semitically.

All I can say is that I am content living adjacent to Minneapolis, not in it. You'd be hard-pressed to find me advocating for leadership that makes manifest in such impolitic fashion.

Related Content

Facebook Comments