..
No, I did not fail to notice the criticism of the chess community. But I
stand by my earlier assessment: IMO, Phil brings up "crimes" committed by the
USCF or others in order to justify or rationalize or minimize, the "crime" of
Fischer.
Sorry, but any actions by others can only be used to place Fischer's own
actions into perspective. They should not be used to justify, rationalize, or
excuse his actions. Doing that brings us right back to the title of this
thread.

Bobby could have played chess for big money anywhere, and at virtually any
time he wanted. But he *chose* to play when and where he did -- hence,
culpability.


Now it would seem that Fischer may fall into the hands of the U.S.
government, and many are assertting that we should all support him as some kind
of innocent victim of Big Brother, gone crazy with power.
But this is not really what happenned. Big Brother held back the big guns,
and utilized a wimpy economic embargo instead, which Bobby deliberately
ignored, calculating that he would be immune by staying just out of Uncle Sam's
reach.
Now it seems the long arm of the Law has caught our hero offguard, and his
gambit is about to be refuted, OTB. I sympathise, but I cannot just pretend
he did no wrong.




that no clinical opinion is worthwhile if the shrink cannot declare himself
disinterested from the result.


I do not regard Dr. Fine's examination or
credentials as sufficient proof of expertise in assessing such a "weirdo" as
Fischer. These book-learned shrinks try to classify people into neat,
predetermined pegholes -- a system better designed for sorting mail, not human
beings.