wrote in message
...
LEAVE THE KIDS OUT OF IT!

Dear Phil Innes,

If Paul Truong's statement is accurate -- and I
think the chances are high that it is -- then I was
right to condemn a few days back the ready habit to
employ a U.S. court action to condemn automatically
parents for what they may or may not be doing.

Dear Larry Parr,

There are those who do not chose to 'notice' its accuracy, yet have received
direct information which attests to its detail. To then proceed /as if/ such
material is unknown, and indeed as if the issue is unresolved, is more than
a bone of contention, that is a form of wilfull distortion for the purpose
of recreating a 'political thriller', and nevermind the casual victims.

To think any of my recent correspondents here by virtue of their own writing
know of or even care for the well-being of children, is not to gild the
lily, but to coat the rhubarb leaf with another substance! That is the issue
against public decency in reporting I mentioned.

In this instance, Sam probably unwittingly
adopted the same tactic that several people on this
and other forums employed against him when he
"kidnapped" his daughter.

We do know that morals stem from 'mores', or custom, and there is no
necessary good or bad in any custom, but what is customary has no bearing on
what is adjudged fit, which instead we call 'ethics'. As such, there is not
even any thought attending on 'morals', and instead we witness habit.

Sometimes such habit is a settled one of morose and misanthropic nature, but
even though it is literally thoughtless it still exists within the checks
and balances of useful inhibition - a strong taboo against the involvement
of innocents shames the conscience, no?

At least, that was always the state of Western culture during the age when
children were seperated from the realm of adults, which is precisely the
literary age when we chose to educate them. That age is now so diminished we
might say it no longer exists, and there is no shield or membrane separating
adults and children in the tv-age, where anyone of any age is spared no
illusion to what are often tawdry adult concerns.

My point earlier was that it was morally
dangerous to pry through the written word into the
lives of families without a full knowledge of
circumstances and hard facts. I noted that EVEN IF
the Tabasco charge were true and acted upon by an
American court, there was likely far more to the story.

In this instance, it appears that the basic
charge, regardless of familial circumstances, was
untrue. That Mr. Truong waited until he had his ducks
properly lined up to respond suggests both a strong
human spirit on his and Susan Polgar's part and a
surprising degree of professionalism.

Yes.

Some of 'us' who have bothered to note the character of the players in the
on-going drama, have bothered to inform our intelligence with the result of
that 'looking'. If it is your point that this is simply responsible adult
behavior, I agree with you.

I am not at all sure that I could have kept my cool
and my keyboard quiet until the correct moment, had I
been in his position.

Quite so. The dilemma being further exposure of one's family or, as it
appears took place, a noble silence.

---

Dr. Neil Postman in 1975 wrote a devastating and very thorough book titled
'The End of Childhood', a title of some 750 words, tracing what constituted
childhood, its origins, worth, and evolution from approximately Elizabethan
times in Europe. He also reported on its decay and destruction; sometimes
from a casual indifference in the modern pysche to any sort of culture at
all, or to anything but egoic behaviors; and he also reported on the
deliberated obfustication of what society had evolved for some 500 years as
a means to allow children to individuate themselves before entering the
adult world. That latter point, says Postman, is not intended to be for the
child's benefit, but is a low attempt at exploitation, for usually fiduciary
of venal purposes.

That is the not the issue here. But that is the context of the culture in
which the issue exists.

I hope that other readers in these newsgroups will attend on your comments;
so that they will see an /indicated/ need for reserving comment before
launching yet another spate of enthusiasticly blind 'investigations.'

That is, if they actually care for anything in the above, and if they wish
to be considered as adults human beings by their peers.

Cordially, Phil Innes

Yours, Larry Parr


Chess One wrote:
wrote in message
...
PAUL TRUONG ANSWERS SAM SLOAN IN ANOTHER FORUM


ALL CHARGES WERE DROPPED. In fact, the same person who made these
bogus charges agreed to drop the charges. But what do you care about
the truth, right?

---

Dear Larry Parr,

You may have noted my challenges here recently to specific persons on
these
issues; those who proposed charges but knowingly repressed the knowledge
of
their results. Or was their intention to investigate actually as they
proposed it of themselves, and they cared not to look further other than
to
amplify accusation while repressing the result of it?

It is merely disgusting that anyone could call themselves 'journalist'
after
that, or respecters of any rule of law which is a minimum standard, never
mind that higher level which is common decency! And disgust is what we
have
become accustomed upon.

And this is merely the /public/ level of exchange of those who would
declare
their orientation in a proxy war. Like you, I opt for full disclosure of
the
whole issue, but unlike you - and here we have a difference, a large
one - I
cannot like what Sam Sloan does in his investigative mode, since I cannot
distinguish that from a McCarthyist adventurism into chess politics.

Younger people will not know what that is, but we do, and we know what it
did. What it does now for USCF it then did to the country, it divided and
made it doubt itself for a decade, and the cold war was all the colder
for
that.

These excursions are some desperate remedy, [really! off any scale] and
are
themselves worse than the addressed complaint, bad as those are - though
it
is a permitted measure by those who pull the strings, and /timor addidit
alas/ employs Puppet Sloan to /divertisments/ to switch languages, but
back
again, which have the effect of /suppressio veri/.

And that is what complainant Sloan does not understand, that he is the
stalking horse for a habit of control he does not even acknowledge but
which
works him; and after some year long engagement, neither do I feel he
wishes
to understand, the moment being of greater force, though acting this way
is
destructive of whatever he thinks he loves and would sustain about chess.

And this is merely of the complainant's psycho-pathology! And that does
not
deserve reprobation as much as much needed understanding both
psychologically and externally, of what a political puppet must
inevitably
become - and the usual fate of the stalking horse.

The crime here is not perpetrated by the evident agent, who I suggest is
grandiloquently insensible to his manipulation, but the result of it is
an
indifference to chess in preference to an attendant fame he thinks is his
bequest and project will be his just reward.

The real criminal minds are not yet described or revealed in this scene.

Cordially, Phil Innes