selves and they discipline their member of the russian olympic committee and the i.o.c. is about 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. pleas 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 don 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'd 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 fleets working and training and dreaming about going to the olympic games and through the decision the i.o.c. is taken there is now an opportunity for that and for those individuals. well but those individuals will not be gratified by seeing the country's flag go by hearing their 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 well 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 this 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 baby 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. has 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 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. took 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 a 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 sports used by russia's adversaries to penalize its unfairly so. i want to use 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 the 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 attributes and what explains that 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 now know has chosen to use those terminologies because. professor mclaren presented those facts and we are merely commenting on the facts that professor mclaren reported in 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 powered 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 the support of the knowledge of this system by the high state authority so that is actually a contradiction and in a tribute to the mclaren report it because the report specifically states that this program was authorized by the highest 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 suggest 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 no i don't dispute that that particular conclusion there was indeed a recognition that officials have been involved in the i think where the contradiction lies is what was the highest level of authorization of doc kind of program and i think the i.c. didn't point specifically to the kremlin as a thing as many what officials have done in the areas 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. so there's no those all important as a person but he is important as far as business evening. goes a risk in the regime falling apart so indeed the americans are americans so much

less to have him leave folderol from time to time they keep seeing it again so in the end i think most countries are accepting that he will stay. credit is one of the basic instruments to drive an economy but it can also lead to tragedy i did i took the how to start game big and meant that the death star game and it was. many lives have been broken really picks since. the banks got you into trouble and all the big bankers come. from the government

the banks but i didn't think of the ordinary man who rushed mornings through the back. creditors people see no future bad things happen you know you become ill you do job your relationship breaks down you become a casualty is a life long trip. away those actually come to a bit of a no right to future bill to apply more to. welcome back to worlds apart dr mccoy each year of the institute of national organizations mr mccourty and just to pick up where we left off the mclaren report relies too much greater extent on the testimonies a by the former had of the russian doping agency gregorio watching the full 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 over. 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 no doubt will consider those things but mr mcwhorter he said 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 he's 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 anti 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 chunk of his concerned 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 irony. no 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 russian was doing his job on behalf of wada and instead what we're seeing is what is celebrating him as a 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 why this perception in the eyes of the russians as an impartial organization 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 on that as does the institute for national anti-doping organizations so from my perspective water is going to continue to fulfill 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 wanted 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 is defined simply because he's not just a whistle blower he was somebody who actually contributed and precipitated in that scheme you mentioned before the issue a lot of participation and one of the leading organizations within why that is the

. american and she 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 the usa spending dog often at least quite a few of brands totaling around thirty six million dollars in three years i just wonder 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 i have all due respect the white house is not a state institution it's a political office. very partisan by its very nature i'm kind of surprised that you don't see anything noteworthy in a political office would be allocating money directly to such a specialized agency would you feel the same way if the kremlin 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 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 up ns in the united states i could certainly fill in how it happens in canada if that's of interest well i just want to point out that interest in antidoping expedia 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 and 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 and various attention deficit disorders which allows legally to be taking drugs with performance enhancing qualities and as somebody who's studied in the in the united states i know for a fact that a.t.g. for example is. over diagnosed in 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 mccreery let me add challenge that because there is still debate in the scientific community of whether for example carbon fiber prints prosthetics known as blades give. any

advantage and despite oscar pistorius 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 be treated cognitive our neural difficulties. in a presidential way should 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 bring. 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 is 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 to the agree with you on that point out only hold that it is not only you who brings recite it to you so desired standard but. once it's reinstated in right it's good to go as 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 tell us please share your coming to facebook and you pages and i hope to see you again same place same time here on worlds apart.

gun some is not so is not that can put place is not a good country and. yes it is the bush administration. loves. you for this but that's just the physical. side of the culture. of the cultivated of the secular suggests. just written by a fellow muslim of oneself to be the middle. of the slow slow. play almost anything for the numbers for the base the last second our better john said i'm based on the other side no one can i do not the last cover we're sliced from trapped with matter how on amanita. from a shallow. chin fucking on

a canal move among us fuel now with the thought the moment. let's researchers on enough hours go show you will see battle to go to the cities in the american armed forces in his or the one of the street the. other you know the lousiest the cods who are supposed to. be fed like when you all know it's coming through and spoke. if somebody would have been to spend my life for two point computers or a little disturbed person who sold through his critics. every night or we were attacked by the arabs we will attack them and we will extremely shocked. saying that's not possible oh me both. and.

myself. with all the pros of war we've all dealt with over the they all are. really much second class citizens in the on call. rules like they like nigger murder that there is no room to be able to do together without to. come. whenever you believe russian products. your not just get a good quality. or little bit of sleep as we.

look to the. demonstrators attempt to storm the u.s. embassy in beirut in protest at donald trump's decision to recognize jerusalem as israel's capital protests have also been seen in bethlehem and gaza. syria has been proclaimed free of islamic states though pockets of she had just remained. russia's banned from the twenty eighteen winter olympics over a doping scandal that erupted two years ago that says the i.o.c. saying there's no concrete evidence to support claims of state sponsored cheating. and out of a persian announces he will run for reelection in the twenty eight eighteen

presidential race.