Yes. Please bring it up because, if you do not, I intend to.

It has been reported that the reason Bill Goichberg does not want to
let Fischer back into the USCF is because Fischer is anti-Semitic.

It has also been reported that Goichberg objected to allowing Boris
Spassky to give a simultaneous chess exhibition in New Jersey because
Spassky is anti-Semitic.

However, I feel, and I think that most chess players agree, that a
chess player's political or social views should have no bearing on
whether they should be allowed to play chess.

Sam Sloan

On Aug 23, 11:28 am, samsloan wrote:

Quote:

Originally Posted by thunderchicken I don't think any of the front runners would care. If Hillary or whoever said this I'm sure the media would have a hay day with it. But I guess as long as we're bringing politics in this, this would be good to point out if and when Sam runs next year.

Yes. Please bring it up because, if you do not, I intend to.

It has been reported that the reason Bill Goichberg does not want to
let Fischer back into the USCF is because Fischer is anti-Semitic.

It has also been reported that Goichberg objected to allowing Boris
Spassky to give a simultaneous chess exhibition in New Jersey because
Spassky is anti-Semitic.


However, I feel, and I think that most chess players agree, that a
chess player's political or social views should have no bearing on
whether they should be allowed to play chess.

Sam Sloan

Anyone can play.. however membership to an organization could and
should have some limitations. If it didn't you would have murderers
and child pronography pedophiles infiltrating the membership ranks. So
the question isn't if Fischer should be permitted to play chess( a
game he has abandoned) but rather should good people foot his bill to
belong to an organization for free?

On Aug 23, 12:37 pm, Rob wrote:
On Aug 23, 11:28 am, samsloan wrote:

Quote:

Originally Posted by thunderchicken I don't think any of the front runners would care. If Hillary or whoever said this I'm sure the media would have a hay day with it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by thunderchicken But I guess as long as we're bringing politics in this, this would be good to point out if and when Sam runs next year.

Yes. Please bring it up because, if you do not, I intend to.

It has been reported that the reason Bill Goichberg does not want to
let Fischer back into the USCF is because Fischer is anti-Semitic.

It has also been reported that Goichberg objected to allowing Boris
Spassky to give a simultaneous chess exhibition in New Jersey because
Spassky is anti-Semitic.
However, I feel, and I think that most chess players agree, that a
chess player's political or social views should have no bearing on
whether they should be allowed to play chess.

Sam Sloan

Anyone can play.. however membership to an organization could and
should have some limitations. If it didn't you would have murderers
and child pronography pedophiles infiltrating the membership ranks. So
the question isn't if Fischer should be permitted to play chess( a
game he has abandoned) but rather should good people foot his bill to
belong to an organization for free?

In fact we have many such persons.

We have several thousand prison members including some mass murderers,
all dues paying members of the USCF.

If they are members, why not let in Fischer who has not been convicted
of anything.

Sam Sloan

On Aug 23, 11:57 am, samsloan wrote:
On Aug 23, 12:37 pm, Rob wrote:





On Aug 23, 11:28 am, samsloan wrote:

Quote:

Originally Posted by thunderchicken I don't think any of the front runners would care. If Hillary or whoever said this I'm sure the media would have a hay day with it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by thunderchicken But I guess as long as we're bringing politics in this, this would be good to point out if and when Sam runs next year.

Yes. Please bring it up because, if you do not, I intend to.

It has been reported that the reason Bill Goichberg does not want to
let Fischer back into the USCF is because Fischer is anti-Semitic.

It has also been reported that Goichberg objected to allowing Boris
Spassky to give a simultaneous chess exhibition in New Jersey because
Spassky is anti-Semitic.
However, I feel, and I think that most chess players agree, that a
chess player's political or social views should have no bearing on
whether they should be allowed to play chess.

Sam Sloan

Anyone can play.. however membership to an organization could and
should have some limitations. If it didn't you would have murderers
and child pronography pedophiles infiltrating the membership ranks. So
the question isn't if Fischer should be permitted to play chess( a
game he has abandoned) but rather should good people foot his bill to
belong to an organization for free?

In fact we have many such persons.

We have several thousand prison members including some mass murderers,
all dues paying members of the USCF.

If they are members, why not let in Fischer who has not been convicted
of anything.

Sam Sloan- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

They shouldn't be members.

On Aug 23, 1:08 pm, Rob wrote:

They shouldn't be members.

I am going to tell some of our members, if and when they get out,
about you.

On Aug 23, 1:13 pm, samsloan wrote:
On Aug 23, 1:08 pm, Rob wrote:

They shouldn't be members.

I am going to tell some of our members, if and when they get out,
about you.

LOL

But I don't exist! According to you!


And if they actually do pay dues... where does that money come from?
How much of the USCF dues come from prison members? How much profit
comes from these memberships? What are the numbers Mohamed?

On Aug 23, 2:20 pm, Rob wrote:
On Aug 23, 1:13 pm, samsloan wrote:

On Aug 23, 1:08 pm, Rob wrote:

They shouldn't be members.

I am going to tell some of our members, if and when they get out,
about you.

LOL

But I don't exist! According to you!

And if they actually do pay dues... where does that money come from?
How much of the USCF dues come from prison members? How much profit
comes from these memberships? What are the numbers Mohamed?

Their dues are subsidized. There is an organization that pays part of
their dues.

They are very active voters. They have the highest percentage of
voters of any category.

Sam Sloan

On Aug 23, 1:31 pm, samsloan wrote:
On Aug 23, 2:20 pm, Rob wrote:





On Aug 23, 1:13 pm, samsloan wrote:

On Aug 23, 1:08 pm, Rob wrote:

They shouldn't be members.

I am going to tell some of our members, if and when they get out,
about you.

LOL

But I don't exist! According to you!

And if they actually do pay dues... where does that money come from?
How much of the USCF dues come from prison members? How much profit
comes from these memberships? What are the numbers Mohamed?

Their dues are subsidized. There is an organization that pays part of
their dues.

They are very active voters. They have the highest percentage of
voters of any category.

Sam Sloan- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

you didn't answer my question

"Taylor Kingston" wrote in message
From an interview of Senator Gravel's spokesperson Shawn Alexander
Colvin to the the newspaper Pravda.ru.

(http://english.pravda.ru/world/ameri...0-senator_mike...)

Second question from the bottom:

PRAVDA.RU: Can you imagine the former chess champion Bobby Fisher
as the
leader of an opposition movement in the USA? Please substantiate
your
answer.

The interviewer must be amazingly ignorant of Fischer's political
and social opinions, or those of most Americans, to ask such an absurd
question.

I disagree. The interviewer seems quite aware of Fischer's views.

My comment still stands. In that case, the interviewer must be
amazingly ignorant of how most Americans would view Fischer's rabidly
racist, anti-Semitic, and anti-American views. Not to mention
Fischer's lifelong preference for being an isolated loner, rather than
a group leader. There is no possibility of Fischer ever becoming any
sort of leader of any substantial political movement in the USA.

That is not quite Pravda's point. It does not reference popular opinion. It
says, regardless of that, that Fischer would be forgiven, etc, in /Russia/.

The Pravda journalist doesn't exactly grok that things are different here -
nor does he want to - 90% of the articles at Pravda comment negatively on
the US. This is nothing new [!] [rofl!]

From the list offered above, there is no reason to resent citizen-Fischer
under US Constitutional law. You don't have to hold views sympathetic to the
goverment's policy in order to hold citizenship. It would be an unpopular
measure to re-award him his citizenship, true, but no legal objection.

Fischer's crime, as the government see it, is a complex of non-tax payments
for income it claims he owes it following the 'war-zone' playing of the
second Spassky match, combined with, as I understand it, risibly and
contentious comments on terroritst actions. The last of these are less
explicit, but post 9/11 it is not exactly a 'nothing' consideration today.

Fischer has expressed no desire to be affiliated with USCF as el Sloan
proposes, nor to return to the US. What el Sloan thinks he is up to is
thereby naught to do with Fischer, but a last-grandstand by el Sloan while
he still has the public eye.

Phil Innes

On Aug 23, 3:29 pm, "Chess One" wrote:
"Taylor Kingston" wrote in message
From an interview of Senator Gravel's spokesperson Shawn Alexander
Colvin to the the newspaper Pravda.ru.

(http://english.pravda.ru/world/ameri...0-senator_mike...)

Second question from the bottom:

PRAVDA.RU: Can you imagine the former chess champion Bobby Fisher
as the
leader of an opposition movement in the USA? Please substantiate
your
answer.

The interviewer must be amazingly ignorant of Fischer's political
and social opinions, or those of most Americans, to ask such an absurd
question.

I disagree. The interviewer seems quite aware of Fischer's views.

My comment still stands. In that case, the interviewer must be
amazingly ignorant of how most Americans would view Fischer's rabidly
racist, anti-Semitic, and anti-American views. Not to mention
Fischer's lifelong preference for being an isolated loner, rather than
a group leader. There is no possibility of Fischer ever becoming any
sort of leader of any substantial political movement in the USA.

That is not quite Pravda's point. It does not reference popular opinion. It
says, regardless of that, that Fischer would be forgiven, etc, in /Russia/.

The Pravda journalist doesn't exactly grok that things are different here -
nor does he want to - 90% of the articles at Pravda comment negatively on
the US. This is nothing new [!] [rofl!]

From the list offered above, there is no reason to resent citizen-Fischer
under US Constitutional law. You don't have to hold views sympathetic to the
goverment's policy in order to hold citizenship. It would be an unpopular
measure to re-award him his citizenship, true, but no legal objection.


Phil,
WHat you say below is most true!
Fischer's crime, as the government see it, is a complex of non-tax payments
for income it claims he owes it following the 'war-zone' playing of the
second Spassky match, combined with, as I understand it, risibly and
contentious comments on terroritst actions. The last of these are less
explicit, but post 9/11 it is not exactly a 'nothing' consideration today.

Fischer has expressed no desire to be affiliated with USCF as el Sloan
proposes, nor to return to the US. What el Sloan thinks he is up to is
thereby naught to do with Fischer, but a last-grandstand by el Sloan while
he still has the public eye.

The "public eye" he thinks he has is probably the equilivant to 1
tenth of one percent of the USCF membership. I dare say he gets a
larger audience while urinating at the restroom of Union Station.

Phil Innes- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Rob( WHich-Mitch) Earl of Mustard