This is a couple of weeks old but since it is so blistering, I thought it merited posting:
Lewis and Co flunk their morality test as drivers toe the line on BahrainBy Martin Samuel
Last updated at 11:52 PM on 9th June 2011
The five men sat expressionless on the podium. There were, at a rough count, 43 commercial slogans displayed on their shirts and baseball caps, but they were of one mind. Sadly, that was under commercial control, too.
One by one, they considered the ethical question that has occupied motor sport all week. The Bahrain Grand Prix may now be dead, but flies from its putrid corpse continue to settle on Formula One.
Rubens Barrichello, speaking as chairman of the Grand Prix Drivers' Association, had said his colleagues did not oppose racing in Bahrain on principle. There were other reasons for not going there. 'The logistics are quite tough for all the teams,' he added.
So there you have it. To visit, and by implication endorse, a country in which a minimum of 31 people have been killed by government forces while campaigning for freedom, was a logistical, not an ethical issue. Reports dissident doctors and nurses had been beaten with wooden boards embedded with nails and made to eat faeces, were of minor consequence compared to getting that F1 show on the road.
The sport has ultimately done the right thing, but not for the right reasons. What should have been a simple question of morality - we don' t go to countries where the government is actively and publicly engaged in the slaughter of its citizens - has instead descended into a row about haulage and staff holidays and a round of political score settling between F1's commercial rights holder, Bernie Ecclestone, and Jean Todt, president of the FIA, motor sport's governing body.
In the middle of it all are the drivers, or they would be if they had the stomach for the fight. It seems contrary to accuse a group who risk their lives daily of lacking courage, but their engagement with the issues arising from the Bahrain GP is pitiful.
Mark Webber, of Red Bull, stands alone in making participation a matter of principle and, compared to his fellow drivers here for the Canadian Grand Prix, he appeared positively heroic. In turn, they were asked if they supported Barrichello's stance, and if Bahrain was not an ethical issue, then why not, and in turn they chose to respond only with the most self-serving, bland platitudes.
The second part of the question remained unanswered. No driver entertained a thought beyond the corporate imperative. For a sport that conjures images of daring young men, operating on what Lewis Hamilton calls the ragged edge of endeavour, it was truly depressing stuff.
'As long as it is safe, I am happy to race,' said Adrian Sutil, of Force India. 'Bahrain is a good place to go. The FIA and the teams will find a solution. I am not in charge of that.'
Seizing on a conformist theme, Vitaly Petrov of Lotus Renault was up next. 'The FIA knows what to do,' he added. 'If it is not dangerous we will go, if it is still dangerous then it is better not.'
'Let's wait for the decision,' said Pastor Maldonado, Barrichello's team-mate at Williams. 'We are drivers, we enjoy to race. It is a difficult moment in Bahrain but we need to wait and see what is decided.'
Then it was Hamilton's turn. 'Hopefully, the teams and the FIA will make the right decision and as drivers we will have to rely on that,' he offered. 'We want to race, not just for the benefit of ourselves but for the benefit of others.'
Sergio Perez had only been passed fit to drive for Sauber in Montreal that morning, following a spectacular crash in Monaco. Maybe he was a little confused. 'I don't know what the latest is,' he said. 'I will speak to my team. If it is one race more, my team races and all the teams agree, there is no problem if it is safe again.'
Where to start with this snivelling crap? To deal with Sutil's safety issues first, plainly the assurance he seeks applies to protection for a travelling band of millionaire racing drivers, their employers and sponsors rather than the Bahrainis resisting the oppression of the ruling Al-Khalifa family.
If it is suddenly peaceful for Sutil and his colleagues, is it too much to ask how it came to be that way?
The same applies to the danger that is so consuming Petrov. Waiting to be told what to do, as Maldonado wishes, is part of the problem.
The drivers have real power here, more than they think. A collective decision that Bahrain was not a suitable venue would have ended the debate overnight, and the sport might have emerged with its reputation enhanced.
Either these guys are unaware of their power, or lack the gumption to take it. Supine compliance suits them, and precludes having to make ethical choices.
Hamilton is equally detached, while claiming he wishes to race for the benefit of others. Who, exactly? A protester being tortured by a strap embedded with nails is hardly likely to have his day brightened by a British F1 driver gunning around Bahrain International Circuit. And who else in that country needs Hamilton's consideration right now?
Having clashed with Todt after the Monaco race, perhaps he was mindful of courting controversy again. Yet what is controversial in denouncing state-endorsed murder? It is Todt's stand that looks increasingly ridiculous now. Sold down the river by the manipulative Ecclestone, he is isolated and not even travelling to Montreal this weekend, such is his diminished status.
As for Perez, why bother? His words were just a rehash of overheard platitudes, reheated and parroted in place of intellectual connection and emotion.
Webber's willingness to respond as a human being, not a marketing man's shill, belittles them all. 'When you've got this much money involved in a sport it is going to be political,' Webber said. 'I like football and that is no different, but as a driver it is important we have an understanding of the places we go to, within reason.
'I haven't been to Bahrain lately, since this started happening, but I understand the feeling about what is going on. There is no reason to go there any more, not with this situation, not for me. That's it.
'We will return if we can and I hope we will in the future. But my view is unchanged. My objection is still on principle and Rubens's position does not change that. I'm not a lone voice. There are a lot of other people who feel like me. I didn't go to the meeting in Monaco when this was discussed but I'm told there were some pretty interesting views.'
Asked if some drivers have different opinions in private to the ones made public, he smiled knowingly. 'Yeah, mate, you know the score.'
Ayrton Senna, whose life is now celebrated in film, would not have stood meekly by and accepted this. If there are men who share Webber's views yet are not making their feelings known, that is shameful.
'It hasn't been an easy situation,' he admitted. 'What has happened is very unfortunate and uncharted waters for a lot of us. But if someone asks you a straightforward question not related to tyre pressures or front wings, it is your duty to give them something real from the way you were brought up.' Such is the horrid conformity of F1, the sentiment almost felt worthy of applause.
And, yes, obviously there are flaws in the argument. Nobody, not even Webber, has talked of principle influencing a boycott of the Grand Prix in China, where the government is every bit as inclined towards brutality. Indeed, as the sport expands into new markets, there are several stops that might cause alarm at Amnesty International.
Governments deal with dubious regimes every day, so why should Hamilton and friends conform to a moral code that eludes elected leaders? Valid objections all. Yet recent events in Bahrain are plainly part of a wider quest for freedom in a subjugated part of the world and it is therefore important that a vicious ruling class is not seen to be endorsed, either internationally, or in the eyes of its people.
Plainly, F1 is intended to increase prestige for Bahrain and the Al-Khalifa dynasty. Huge money was paid to make it the first race on the grand prix calendar because then the event would attract celebrities to the region. The investment to build the track and infrastructure was £1.22billion.
Sometimes, it is about more than just numbers, though. Sometimes it is about doing, and saying, what is right. As Ecclestone and Todt continued to squabble and score points, and the household faces of motor racing wore nothing more on their sleeves than a smear of brand endorsements, Webber stood nobly apart.
'I always try to do what is best for the sport,' Hamilton said. Sadly, it was just another line. Hamilton and the rest had the chance to do more; instead, they chose to run on fumes.
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connaît point. 
That's amazing how you've got tomorrow's news, today!
