Max Mosley opens a can of worms.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Garry Walker

It will be interesting to see how he will behave from now on and if he will be at Montreal for example at the F1 gp. Because I think he will be and he will make himself be seen as much as possible

---

I read on Autosport (can't find the link now) that Max would not attend a GP until July or August. It seems as if his deputies will be undertaking many of the FIA President's public duties from now on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valve Bounce

A Ruling Council within the FIA is required to control on the direction of motorsport.

---

I think it is certainly time to reverse the merger of motorsport and motoring activities that was done when Max became FIA President.

Montezemolo: Mosley should quit

Quote:

---

Ferrari president Luca di Montezemolo has added his voice to the debate surrounding Max Mosley, calling the FIA president to stand down from his role despite winning a vote of confidence from the governing body's General Assembly.

"I believe he himself should understand that at times it is necessary to say 'I must leave the place for reasons of credibility'."

---

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/67977

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by W8&C

Take crimes as an analogy:

as long as the crook can keep his e.g. robberies „private“ everything and everyone ´s cool. But wait `til the delicts become public... Nontheless its illegal in both cases. I guess its fundamental that one can only react to and deal with things when he gets knowledge of them.

---

But someone's private sexual behaviour may very well not be illegal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

But someone's private sexual behaviour may very well not be illegal.

---

But it becomes the question of their suitability for the job, doesn't it.

Like having a homophobic minister responsible for the law on same sex partnerships.

Or a racist in charge of immigration....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mickey T

the population or the population density is irrelevant to a fair and democratic vote.

what he is suggesting is that there should be representation with some weighting towards the number of motorists, not the number of people, given that the FIA - and by extension, Max - purports to represent the world's motorists.

a democratic voting process to achieve pro-rata representation for the world's motorists is a very different thing from a voting process to achieve the voting outcome Mosley wanted.

as has been written here before, the number of motorists in china and india might be growing but is, at present, negligible compared to those in the US, Germany, Canada, the UK, France, Spain, Japan, Italy etc.

---

Thanks Micky. Spot on.

There will be a time where the motoring organisations of China and India do indeed rank them as dominant players. Even now, they are becoming significant and therefore require appropiate recognition.

However, I cannot see how organisations like the AAA command the same recognition and power as the Vatican in the FIA.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

But it becomes the question of their suitability for the job, doesn't it.

Like having a homophobic minister responsible for the law on same sex partnerships.

Or a racist in charge of immigration....

---

The FIA isn't in charge of any of those activities. :p :

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

The FIA isn't in charge of any of those activities. :p :

---

Doh! :laugh: But the analogy is the point I was making. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Garry Walker

Ioan earlier did something very unusual for him and actually highlighted a good reason why the big players want him out. It is all about money and him helping the lesser organizations.

---

I'm also impressed with the fact that you finally found reason in one of my posts! :p :
Jokes aside, I'm glad to see there are people who think but I'm also sad to see that only one other person around here did understand what this was all about, although the comments of the Dutch representative were quoted a few times in this thread.

People mostly post here because they are in rage, because their emotions, so masterfully controlled by the media, push them to express their frustrations. However very few did try to think about what exactly was the reason behind the votes cast Tuesday.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

I'm also impressed with the fact that you finally found reason in one of my posts! :p :
Jokes aside, I'm glad to see there are people who think but I'm also sad to see that only one other person around here did understand what this was all about, although the comments of the Dutch representative were quoted a few times in this thread.

People mostly post here because they are in rage, because their emotions, so masterfully controlled by the media, push them to express their frustrations. However very few did try to think about what exactly was the reason behind the votes cast Tuesday.

---

A whiparound for Max's defence? :D :D :rotflmao:

Man you're incorrigible! :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

But it becomes the question of their suitability for the job, doesn't it.

Like having a homophobic minister responsible for the law on same sex partnerships.

Or a racist in charge of immigration....

---

In what way does Mosley's sexual behaviour in itself affect his ability to carry out his FIA role? If we leave out the as yet unproven Nazi element, I don't see the two things as being linked in such a way as the examples you describe where there is a definite 'conflict of interests'.