some people say that. because media has sold itself out to hawks like you i daresay that this is the least painful decision the ice you could take where do you stand on well the i.o.c. of course has its absolute discretion around the olympic games and and the currency that they use is participation so as they examine the situation i'm sure they arrived at a difficult decision but the decision was that the russian olympic committee their member should not be able to participate in the games and i think they've created a wise decision in allowing enabling a pathway for russian athletes to participate in the game so essentially what are you saying that it was a compromise of sorts well i think the i.o.c. enforce the rules that it has its disposal and it led to the situation we find

ourselves in they disciplined their member of the russian olympic committee and the i.o.c. is about a good strong olympic games so they they recognize that and have used the expression they don't want to use collective punishment so they created the opportunity for. us from russia to participate in the olympic games well it's interesting you say he did they haven't actually resorted to the collective punishment because they are as i'm sure you would agree dozens of clean the russian athletes who have been denied an opportunity to represent their country and the government not the kremlin not president putin but that country all one hundred forty six million people each and every one of them you said previously that you are not against russia you are against cheating but why then do you support these sort of collective punishment dot denies people who did nothing wrong and i'll put sheets you. be proud about da country well unless i misunderstand the decision the

i.o.c. took. the i.o.c. has created a pathway for russians to come and participate and that's a good thing there are obviously thousands of russian athletes working and training and dreaming about going to the olympic games and through the decision the i.o.c. has taken there is now an opportunity for that to happen for those individuals. well but those individuals will not be gratified by seeing that country's flag go by hearing that country's national anthem and it is their country that has invested lots of resources into training again they have done nothing wrong and it is not only those athletes but also millions of fans who will be watching the olympics don't you think that they have been penalized unfairly while i think the enforcement of the charter of the olympic charter by the i.o.c.

against this its member is a very legitimate and responsible thing to do and the consequence of the rules that they agreed to participate by and and in force in russia as the russian olympic committee the consequence of that has repercussions i think the i.o.c. has created a really good way to demonstrate that doping and cheating at the olympic games won't be tolerated yet they've they've not taken a collective view against the individuals from russia who are going to participate if they can demonstrate to the i.o.c. you know one thing that makes me rejoice at these outcome is that i suspect that both the russian public and athletes from russia may prove very creative in finding ways to sort of draw attention to that country of origin aren't you

concerned that this denial of visibility to russian national symbols can actually backfire in making them even more visible because you can ban. the sort of the playing of the russian anthem but you cannot ban the athletes from singing it acapella you cannot ban the spectators to fans from raising the russian flag on this dance to don't you think that the russians would actually be gratified by drawing even more attention to themselves well i mean i guess that's not part of the mandate of the. institute of national anti doping organizations i don't fully understand the i.o.c. is position on these things and and it's very clear over the history of the olympic games there have been many individual locks that of have. been taken by individual participants during those games to express a point of view so i presume that russian athletes are no different in that respect than the i.o.c. we'll have to figure out how to deal with those those responses and reactions now

the new york times ran an all pad just the other day titled the olympic ban house mr putin and herds russia and they're making a key speech i generally greed that these bond deeds to comment yet another opportunity to rally people around the flock in the final months before our presidential elections how do you feel about mr putin being given what some would claim is an unfair political advantage well again from from my perspective i don't follow closely the political situation in russia although i recognize the historical significance there i think from my perspective the the the i.o.c. and enforcing its rules has to make those decisions based on the facts that it has in hand and i think the i.o.c. to great care and some period of time before rendering that the situation so my sense is that and we've expressed that earlier this week we we appreciate the fact

that the i.o.c. finally made a decision in time for individual russian athletes who can demonstrate that they deserve to go to the olympics and and are clean like their fellow competitors that they deserve a chance to be there mr mcwhorter let me just clarify my question because it is interesting to me to get your view on whether you believe sports. connected to politics in any way because russia is this very passionate country. about its athletes it is also very patriotic country and i can tell you for sure heard that politicians use sports for personal benefit there is also a feeling in this country that sport being used by russia's adversaries to penalize its unfairly so. i want you the political considerations figure at all in these doping scandal on either side well i take

a different view about the purpose of sport in the benefit of sport i mean sport is a very powerful way to build character and improve the lives of of individual citizens in all of our countries and the joy of competition is really what drives the fleets and coaches that participate at the level take the sochi winter games. there was a very striking moment in a in a men's sprint semifinal where a russian competitor broke his ski and a canadian cross-country ski coach ran to his rescue with a ski intended for canadian athletes and put it on the russians foot so that he could finish the race that to me is the real power of the olympic of the olympic games of the olympic movement well and yet you organization also comments on issues that. that could be deemed as political for example i know which is that in the recent i need a statement language about the suppose its role of the russian state in the

developing controversy was somewhat modified you no longer use the mclaren charge of state sponsored interference instead you referred to it as the institutional doping and institutional while it is also a damning term it's not quite the same as state sponsored it lacks. what explains that shift well i think you refer to the mclaren report in again unless i misunderstand mclaren report in its final form also use that terminology and noted that there was a systematic effort to subvert the doping system and characterized it that way so i know has chosen to use those terminologies because. professor mclaren presented those facts and we were merely commenting on the facts that professor

mclaren reported in that particular instance that has been upheld by the i.o.c. schmid commission it's been up held through other processes within the sports system so that's why we chose to use that term i'm not quite sure that it was fully by the smith commission because the i.o.c. report clearly states that the commission had not found any documented independent and impartial abbott duns confirming to support of the knowledge of this system by the high state authority so that is actually a contradiction in. to the mclaren report because the report specifically states that this program was authorized by the highest and the highest level of a state the i.c. didn't go that far so we have these two reports you find more credible. well again i think i think mclaren's reports are just institutionalized doping and a systematic approach to do that. report was released earlier this week

and as i understand it to suggest that there were officials involved in a variety of organizations including. including the ministry of sporting clued in the russian olympic committee and including the the. russian anti doping lab that participated in this process so they too have recognized that there were multiple players involved in this effort to subvert the doping system now i don't dispute that that particular conclusion there was indeed a recognition that officials had been involved but the i think where the contradiction lies is what was the highest level of authorization of that kind of program and i think the i.c. didn't point specifically to the kremlin as a thing as many wada officials have done in the years well my reading of the schmidt report and the decision the i o. i.o.c.

took was that the the ministry of sport had some officials involved and i believe one of the disciplinary actions they took was the then minister of sport at the time should be held responsible for the activities of the officials in the ministry of sport and that's where the that's the limit to which certainly i now know would comment on is reflected in in the reports from professor mclaren and and now the schmidt report well mr mcwhorter we have to take a short break now but we will be back in just a few moments stay tuned. hey

everybody i'm stephen baldwin gosselin tast hollywood guy you know suspects every proud american first of all i'm just george washington and r.v. to suggest this is my buddy max famous financial guru and well just a little bit different i'm honest abraham lincoln or no no no one knows up with all the drama happening in our country i'm shooting the road have some fun meet everyday americans come home and hopefully start to bridge the gap this is the great american people which. began to. join me every thursday on the alex salmond show and i'll be speaking to guests of the world

of politics sport that's less i'm show business i'll see you than. welcome back to worlds apart to document for each year of the constituent nash not tilting organizations mr mcwhorter just to pick up where we laughed off the mclaren report relies too much greater extent on the testimonies by the former had of the russian anti doping agency gregorio watching a few claims that he himself played a vital role in dots large scale cheating procuring illicit substances tampering with the samples opening up those containers etc do you believe he should

face legal responsibility for his own role in all of this well although you knew you identified him as the head of our the russian anti-doping agency i think he was the lab director in the moscow accredited by water i think the decisions taken by water with respect to his oversight and. we would respect that's their area of operation and he's obviously been very strongly implicated in this process and the officials that are responsible to mete out those justice no doubt will consider those things but mr mcwhorter he isn't just only is it only why it's business to decide what would happen to him because from what i understand and he himself is very detailed in describing his wrongdoing his own role in this whole scheme that involved criminal action you know dealing in illicit substances

breaking into classified facilities isn't that something that should be dealt with in a court of law because. it seems to me that it's not just an athlete killed since the crash and this is actually a criminal activity right well i guess from my perspective where we work i now go we work with the individual national and the doping agencies around the world one of our members is we are really focused on helping. become return to the place of compliance with the world anti-doping code and be able to run a robust and independent anti doping program in in russia and we've we've enjoyed meeting the new staff there and beginning that collaboration and so far as mr rudd chank off his concern from our perspective there is a huge violation of trust that is found in the world anti-doping code that we all

signed on to and agreed to enforce and from my perspective his involvement is is a travesty and his agreement to participate in this institution institutionalized doping system is is a tragedy beyond belief so you know what what happens to mr rudd cenk of going forward i can't comment i don't even know where the gentleman is but i do know that his actions were a very very significant or did very significant damage to the credibility of anti-doping it's not just the russians who have some cleaning to do but also why that band of the day was doing his job on behalf of wada and instead what we're seeing is what is celebrating him as the whistleblower when in fact he is an accomplice at the very least he's expertise was bydel to making that whole scheme

possible he could have stopped it at any moment he did and don't you think that bringing him to justice into legal silence would benefit what is perception in the eyes of the. russians as an impartial organisation committed to anti doping practices while i certainly do believe that his his part in the process was instrumental in fact i know some people may have even suggested that he was one of the ringleaders in conceiving the process i don't know the information well enough to comment on that but i do know that water has a very extensive responsibility in this area in enforcing the world anti-doping code and i think water has demonstrated its willingness to enforce the world anti-doping code and the penalties that are found within the world anti-doping code and the other rules that are found within the world anti-doping code i believe water is doing a great job and that is the institute for national anti-doping organizations so

from my perspective water is going to continue to fulfil their mandate and follow the rules that drive the organization and are subject to assessment by the membership of water which is comprised of fifty percent governments and fifty percent the sport movement so no doubt there's lots of pressure on want to do the right thing well the right thing would be. bringing mr roach in cause to account for his own actions and not letting him to play a claim the whistle blowing defense as defined simply because he's not just a whistleblower he was somebody who actually contributed and persisted baited in that scheme you mentioned before the issue a lot of participation and one of the leading organizations within why that is the . american anti doping agency which. starting in january two thousand and fifteen began receiving multi million dollar grounds directly from the executive

office of the american president as well as a number of brands from the u.s. department of defense. for anyone interested the data is available at the usa spending dog off at least quite a few of brands totaling around thirty six million dollars in three years i just wondered if you find it surprising that the white house and the pentagon have so much direct interest in anti doping activities well i think it's the it's the mandate of all governments of the world who have signed the you know sco convention against doping to take the steps in their country to to fulfill the enforcement of the world anti-doping code and they do that through a variety of means through promoting messages through funding organizations through making available the resources for anti doping activities to be undertaken so

i wouldn't be surprised if governments around the world at their highest levels are committing funds to eliminate doping in sport it's the greatest threat to the credibility of sport and the greatest threat to the promise that sport has found within the olympic values well to the respect the white house is not a state institution it's a political office which is very partisan by its very nature i'm kind of surprised that you don't see anything noteworthy political office would be allocating money directly to such a specialized agency would you feel the same way if the cramond would have been found wiring money directly to rosado would. set off any red flags while. your knowledge of the internal funding of national governments is obviously much better than mine i think that from the point of view of the way the dollars within a government's operations find their way into. battling doping in sport and

promoting the messages around the value of the sport is and is a national concern and. it's. under national jurisdiction that's sovereign it's independent and each country i guess has their own manner in making that happen and so i can't comment on the way things are in the united states i could certainly feel and how it happens in canada if that's of interest well i just want to point out that interest in antidoping activity by the. white house. occurred immediately after the sochi olympics i mean that's when the money started coming not before but starting in january two thousand fifteen but i want to ask you one more. question specifically about the north american practices i'm not sure about canada but it seems that team usa has an oversized representation of athletes with various attention deficit disorders which allows legally to

be taking drugs with performance enhancing qualities and there's somebody who started in the in the united states i know for a fact that a.t.g. for example is. over diagnosed and the country i mean that is a fact that is accepted by medical professionals there i just wonder don't you think that would give a somewhat unfair advantage to the american athletes when they can legally take drugs would not be available to other athletes. well i guess to really answer that question one has to look at the rules around therapeutic use exemption which are available to all athletes in the world and the premise there oksana is that athletes who require medication for healthy living might otherwise be banned in sport have the right to apply to use those things and

those medications and the application process is very thorough it's vetted domestically it's vetted internationally and it must be ultimately approved and signed off by the world anti-doping agency and by the international sports federation that the athlete participates in and it's and it's true i think that globally different medical issues present themselves at different rates and the medical systems respond to those things differently in those countries i.e. i remain very convinced that the rules around therapeutic use exemption and the oversight that goes along with those things. are appropriate there and forced and very clearly the athletes that are enabled to use those medications may only use them to the level of returning to normal health which means that the dosage is the

dosage is watched very carefully the nature of the drug that's watched is is particularly important and often times the committees that make those decisions advocate the use of other medications that may not provide those those same performance enhancing benefits that you that you have are describing here so with all of those safeguards in place i think it's more appropriate to allow athletes that have medical conditions to be able to enjoy the benefits of sport and. to participate in sport where they otherwise wouldn't be able to well mr mccrary let me add challenge that because there is still a debate in the scientific community of whether for example carbon fiber prints prosthetics known as blades give. any advantage and despite oscar pistorius this but he said based in the london olympics the athletes have been denied that right specifically because the scientific community believes that there may be an unfair

advantage why should they be treated cognitive our neural difficulties. in a presidential way shouldn't those athletes if they have those issues be competing in paralympics well again i think the it all starts with establishing the rules and the rules that govern doping are established every four or five years at the conference that all countries participate in and agree to a set of rules and the standards that support those rules which those standards really bring a lot of body and life to the to the rules from the point of view of how testing should occur the medications that may be permitted the sports specific areas of interest the way laboratories run and so on any country that doesn't agree with the rules that are in place and the rules that are being enforced have the right to argue those with their peers and colleagues on

a regular basis and then it's merely enforcing those rules so it seems to me that the issue is whether or not there the rule you would agree with and i think the debate that exists is is clear and that's the nature of an association such as the olympics and such as international sport there are different approaches and different opinions and we do our best to try and establish a common approach and we share that knowledge freely around the world and for example in canada we have welcomed we have hosted rusa and we hope soon to be. back in and share all of our information and approaches to this thing so that they can develop the the same type of standards and utilize them if they believe they're helpful within the country so it's a collective approach and i don't think that there's a single right way to proceed in this area other than the common agreement that

we all arrive at and agreed to abide by well mr mcquarrie i said in the agree with you on that point out only hold that it is not only you who brings responded to you said desire standard but. once it's reinstated in right it's good to get those issues and discuss them freely with both american and canadian colleagues unfortunately we have to leave it here we are out of time but i really really appreciate you being on our show and to use please share your comments and on twitter facebook and u two pages and i hope to see you again same place same time here on the world apart.

so there's no those all important as a person but he is important in as far as is living would cause a risk in the regime falling apart so indeed the americans are americans so much less to have him leave old all from time to time they keep saying at the so in the end i think most countries are accepting that the will state. it is one of the basic instruments to drive an economy but it can also lead to tragedy i did i took a line just i came to god and meant that the text i came and it was. many lives have been broken by excessive. banks got you into trouble and all the big bankers come. and they go on the banks but i just didn't think of the

men who lost money through the back under don't buy creditors people see no future bad things happen you know you become ill you due to job your relationship breaks down you become a casualty is dead on life long credit or is there a way out those actually come to a bit of you know would like to ditch bill for so much. more.

tear gas and water cannon as demonstrators try to storm the u.s. embassy in the lebanese capital beirut in protest of donald trump's decision to recognize jerusalem as israel's capital. russia's ban from the twenty eighteen winter olympics after the deepening scandal which erupted two years ago that's despite the international olympic committee saying there's no concrete evidence to back claims that the state sponsored the drugs program. and vladimir putin and on says he will run for reelection in the twenty eighteen presidential race.