Bobby Fischer Found

paulydavis writes "Former world chess champion Bobby Fischer, wanted since 1992 for playing a tournament in Yugoslavia despite U.N. sanctions, was detained in Japan for an apparent passport violation and will be deported to the United States."

Comments

Changed the view of the US?

[garcia]

Radio Interview from 9/11/2001.

While I disagree with just about everything he has to say he did mention (paraphrase) "now that the Cold War is over and now they want to wipe me out because I am useless." He's probably right. The USSR was using their hand picked superstars (athletes mostly) to make their country seem superior. Bobby Fischer certainly made the US look much better than usual in that regard, but he has the view that he single-handedly changed the view of the United States from a baseball and football (US) country to one of intellectuals... This I just don't agree with. Maybe for that brief moment in time (1972). It's certainly not considered that now (or in 2001).

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[TopShelf]

Maybe for that brief moment in time (1972). It's certainly not considered that now (or in 2001).

Oh, just give that Jeopardy guy a chance. By the time he tops $10 million, the country will be teeming with Brainiac wannabes...

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[Anonymous Coward]

What are you talking about? we certainly are a country of intellectuals now. we don't let jingoism and "big lie" techniques distract us from the important issues of the day, we have a thoughtful, well-reasoning president who knows being intelligent means you have to adapt to the situation, even change your views, and not stubbornly believe something despite all facts saying otherwise, we are reading books other than the bible, we believe in evolution and not creationism, and we understand that upper class tax cuts may provide a temporary "high" but will only lead to misery later on.

Oh wait that was just in my dreams

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[mumblestheclown]

What you say may or may not be true, but it bears noting that baseball and american football are two of the most intellectual sports around. In fact, off the top of my head i'm having a hard time coming up wih any examples of more intellectual major team sports (and mind you, I have been a rather serious futbol player for quite a number of years now - the beautiful game is more about skill, athleticism, and spur-of-the-moment creativity than intellect).

In fact, the only continental team sport that comes close in terms of intellectual elegance i think is cycling (a la the tour de france - forget about team pursuit and other such stupidities), and even then the issue is somewhat muddled because you have different teams vying for different goals (different jerseys, stage victories, long stage leads to maximize sponsor exposure, etc).

You may or may not think that baseball is boring, and you may be of the mistaken impression that american football is a game where people don't get hurt seriously because they wear pads, but to call these sports the opposite of intellectual may not be the best example. both involve deep strategy in addition to atheleticism, skill, an undersanding of stochastic processes, etc.

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[AsbestosRush]

Pardon while I feed the troll...

and we understand that upper class tax cuts may provide a temporary "high" but will only lead to misery later on.

Document this, and I *might* believe it.

I don't know of a single person who doesn't want to keep more $$$ in their pocket. Those that make the most $$$ generally (not always, but generally) create jobs by doing one of two things:
1. Becoming a consumer. These people purchase things that have to be manufactured, or want services that can only be met by someone else.
2. Creating a business.

Creating jobs broadens the tax base. Where's the loss for your "big government" needs there?

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[Otter]

Well I had never heard of him before this.

At the time, though, he was very widely known. Not quite "Miracle On Ice" level, maybe, although Fischer may in fact have higher name recognition than Mike Eruzione or Ken Morrow. Certainly they made a movie about Fischer first.

It's amazing how poor people's memory can be, but the image of the Soviet Union as a nuclear-armed Bulgaria was created purely in hindsight. Fischer was before my time, but I'm old enough to remember be lectured about how we lazy, stupid American kids were doomed in the face of Soviet schoolchildren studying hours of astrophysics every day before heading off to physical training that exceeded what NFL players did back then. I was a bit startled when Russian children started arriving in our school. (Mostly Jewish emigres whose parents had served time.) I was "This is what they keep scaring us over?"

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[Richthofen80]

It's certainly not considered that now (or in 2001).
By Whom?

The United States won the biggest brainiac contest in 1969 when we beat the entire world to the Moon. (although there was only one contender) The United States invented the motorized aircraft, the polio vaccinne, the internet, the light bulb, the movie camera. They discovered how to harness the atom bomb. We have a lot of intellectual achievement under our belt. Whether we won a chess tournament shouldn't contribute to that; I admire chess as a game or sport, but it is hardly an indicator of the intellectual capacity of a nation.

I know what you're really saying; the rest of the world thinks we are loud, crass, and uncivil. They think so because we come with more common sense and know-how, and we call things like they are. Most Americans refuse to buy into the socialist dreams of the intellectuals of Europe. In Europe both the popular opinion and the opinion of the 'intellectuals' is one of self-sacrifice, egalitarianism, and anti-capitalism. In the US it is only our intellectuals. Our 'common folk' still believe in hard work and the self-made man, its why we've got a majority of the intellectual achievements of the last two centuries under our belts.

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[aePrime]

Pardon while I feed the trol...

Sure, people like money! But let's say Bill Gates gets a tax cut (or some other wealthy businessman). Does this mean the Microsoft will hire more people? Not likely. MS has billions in cash, they can hire whoever they like. Bill's a smart guy - MS hires people when they need people, not when they have more cash. This can be applied to any large wealthy company.

Will Bill spend more money? Well, rich people don't get rich by spending money. He's got a lot to spend, if he wants. I doubt this will encourage him to spend more.

Giving money to the lower class, however, is a better idea. I'm not rich. I tend to spend all I make, because, well, I have to. If I kept more of my money, I'd probably spend that too. Poor people spend more of their money than rich people do, because rich people don't have to spend large percentages of their money.

I'm no economist; this is just the say I see things.

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[reidbold]

Every sport involves deep strategy. Just because you are not familiar with these strategies doesn not mean the don't exist.

Saying that 'merican football and baseball are somehow head and shoulders above everyone else is simply ignorant.

Of all the sports I'm familiar with, I honestly can't think of one where being smart, quick thinking, and strategical isn't an asset.

Maybe ultimate frisbee? All that requires is getting in the open. And even that requires some planning.

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[lpp]

And the toss it in the bank to earn interest.

And the bank gets the money to pay the interest by loaning the money out.

And the money goes out in the form of business loans, home loans, car loans, personal loans, lines of credit and so forth.

The homes are bought and money goes out to various individuals related to that industry. And the cars are bought likewise. And the personal loans are taken out to pay for various things around the house or what not. And the lines of credit likewise.

And the business loans? The business loans pay for new equipment (which will operated by new employees) and new buildings (which will be occupied by new employees) and new employees, which will.. erm.. right.

Anyway, while I'm not convinced about trickle down theory myself, to simply stop and say "Well, they toss it in the bank and that's it" is a bit short sighted.

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[TrentTheWiseA]

You might think about Nascar racing as an intellectual sport, if you get past the redneck stereotypes. Calculating pit times, average speeds, fuel consumption, drafting to save fuel, remaining laps, average lap speed, etc, etc, etc,..

It's amazing how much skullwork goes into planning and managing a driver in a race.

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[Anonymous Coward]

Unless Bill puts his money underneath his mattress, or buries it in the back yard, then the money is out in the economic system. And poor people tend to spend their money poorly, like lottery tickets, and another Dale Earnhardt commemorative plate, "I can't guarantee the plate will go up in value, but all the other ones have."

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[torpor]

Whether we won a chess tournament shouldn't contribute to that; I admire chess as a game or sport, but it is hardly an indicator of the intellectual capacity of a nation.


what you and your american grandparent (post) are failing to understand, entirely, is that this is a conversation about propaganda, and ways in which fischer was used as a propagandist tool, in that era.

in such a realm, none of the bold, assertive, we-are-the-best american 'facts' you and your brethren spout forth, have -any- bearing whatsoever. propaganda is not a 'truth' realm, its not about whats real.

it amazes me today that americans -still- know nothing about propaganda, and fail to accomodate it continually in their dialectic views of anything that might be 'anti-american'.

whether or not america 'is the best' at anything, at the time of the fischer (propaganda) project, the fact is: general, popular culture, in realms all over the world, had a pretty dim view of american 'thuggery' and whether the holy american system really was any better than communism/socialism.

fischer was not just about soviet-era 'games' (which we all know americans will always, always win, at), it was also about softening peoples upset over such things as vietnam, korea, etc... remember kids: the cold war was certainly not just between the soviets and the capitalists.

propaganda. learn it, or suffer under its ever-dominant rule, its a religion holier even than The American Way ...

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[RevAaron]

No joke. One of the reasons the wealthy are wealthy is that they know how to save. How to put their money somewhere it gains interest, be it the bank or the market.

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[amliebsch]

it amazes me today that americans -still- know nothing about propaganda

Fancy that, Americans care more about reality than appearances.

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[Lumpy]

Huh? you obviousally never played a round of Australian Rules Football.

That is the most civilized and intelectual game ever invented.

Most of the players can identify almost all human internal organs and bones just by looking at them lying there on the playing field.

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[Amarok.Org]

I know what you're really saying; the rest of the world thinks we are loud, crass, and uncivil. They think so because we come with more common sense and know-how, and we call things like they are.

Yes, the rest of the word sees us as loud, crass, and uncivil. It's not, however, because we have common sense or know-how.

(FWIW I'm an American, quite proudly)

Travel somewhere else in the world where Americans travel or vacation. Pick a quiet bench somewhere and just watch. It's quite easy to spot the Americans, generally. They're loud, crass, and uncivil. As a stereotype, they tend to expect and demand status in their new locale simply based on their classification as "American". "I'm an American," they boast loudly to anyone who will listen. The fact is, no one really cares. Of course we have a long list of accomplishments to be proud of - but it doesn't give us the right to disregard foriegn cultures or customs - particularly when we're IN that culture.

There's a reason the average American tourist gets treated poorly or at least indifferently in most countries - we don't make the effort to be sensitive to the environment we're in. There's a certain swagger Americans like to put on while travelling and it's quite insulting to the locals. We as a country get branded as loud-mouthed hicks, because those are the people that are most visible. If only more Americans would grab their own kind and say "Shut up, you're in someone else's country, be respectful," Americans would have a better reputation. It all comes down to respect. As Americans we're taught from day one that we're the superior, chosen country - and the weaker minded often try to remind the rest of the world of it too.

All it takes to change this perception is respect - respect your own country enough to make a good impression, and respect your hosts enough to play by their cultural rules. If you don't like their cultural rules, go back home.

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[cbelt3]

Sort of, but, well, Blah. It's not that the "United States" grows intelligent people any more or less than any other country on this planet. Same base gene pool, kids. It's more that this country offers / offered the necessary freedoms and opportunities to let the hard working folks with dreams dream and achieve great things. Now that we're becoming more like other countries with more lawyers than scientists and philosphers, it's tougher to achieve dreams. Especially when everyone is suing you. Of course, that happened a lot back then (think Tesla)

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[hraefn]

I beg to differ.

Auto racing is most definitely a sport. It requires lightning-quick reflexes, endurance, and smarts.

It also requires the most cojones.

ESPN.com did a nice article that reflects this.

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[neonduckshoe]

That's an excellent example. Bill gates is fairly representative of most tax payer after all... ACK..AHEM... ERR...

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[Tassach]

One of the reasons the wealthy are wealthy is that they know how to save

Yeah, it's easy to save 10% of your income when you're making $250K/yr, can afford to hire a top-notch tax advisor and can afford to put thousands of dollars into tax shelters. It's a bit more difficult to save 10% of your income when you're making $25K/yr and you have kids to support. The guy making $250K can save $25K a year effortlessly, with zero impact on his family's standard of living. The guy making $25K can save $2.5K a year but doing so will seriously hurt his family's standard of living.

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[sbma44]

Actually Utimate, when played at a high level, involves a lot of strategy. There are a number of different defenses and offenses. Interestingly, the entire defensive team needs to react in unison when the disc changes hands on the offensive side -- the person doing the guarding tries to force the thrower to one side or the other (to either a conventional backhand throw or a 'flick', depending on that thrower's individual strength). Everyone else needs to adjust the defense they're playing to anticipate the disc arriving from that direction. It's quite a trick.

Certainly it's not as complicated as American football, but I'd say it could give basketball a run for its money (in terms of complexity) once fully developed.

But I only played college ultimate for one semester six years ago -- I'm sure there's a lot more to it than I picked up, and that the strategy has advanced since then. In fact, the reason I stopped playing (besides not being physically competitive with the amazing athletes that succeed at the sport) was that there was too much strategy -- I had learned Ultimate in basic pickup games, with lots of quick cuts and flashy plays. Played at a high level, the sport was too disciplined and complex for me to find it much fun.

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[aananth_s]

They discovered how to harness the atom bomb

And how many german scientists worked on it ;)

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[clary]

Tax cuts are a "temporary high" because they must be met by either lower government spending in the future, undoing 1., or higher interests rates and higher interest payments to non-US residents, undoing 2.

Discussion of tax cuts always seem to ignore a crucial factor: the tax rate before the cut. From what information I have been able to gather in my feeble, non-economist research, the tax rate cuts of Reaganomics were followed by an increase in tax revenue. (Reagan spent that and more, but that is another story.)

Anyway, look at it this way. What will be the total revenue if the tax rate were 0 percent? Zero. What will be the total revenue if the tax rate were 100 percent? I can guarantee you that tax revenue from my lazy ass would also be zero in that case. If you are trying to maximize revenue, then there is a sweet spot someplace in between. (Whether maximizing revenue should be the goal is also another discussion.)

A serious discussion of taxes must consider what should be the absolute tax rate. Republicans want to lower tax rates? Make them tell you what is their ideal tax rate for each income level. Democrats say tax cuts are irresponsible? Make them tell you what rates for each income level would be appropriate.

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[haystd]

This creates debt, not more money.
Not necessarily, debt can be used wisely. For example, a mortgage can be a very good thing as long as a person intelligently shops for a home and a good mortgage and doesn't buy beyond their means, plus most people can deduct a portion of the interest (on homes) in the US. The same is true of college loans, it provides the resources to go to college for many and the interest may be deductible.

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[Anonymous Coward]

I was a bit startled when Russian children started arriving in our school. (Mostly Jewish emigres whose parents had served time.) I was "This is what they keep scaring us over?"

Depends on where they were coming from. A friend from Kiev area says everyone in his school district went through summer military training, learning to throw grenades, fire guns, etc, and that this was common throughout the area. When i mentioned this to a girl from Azerbaijan, she just rolled her eyes and said, "We never did anything like that - those Ukranians took everything way too seriously".

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[Brian_Ellenberger]

But let's say Bill Gates gets a tax cut (or some other wealthy businessman). Does this mean the Microsoft will hire more people? Not likely. MS has billions in cash, they can hire whoever they like. Bill's a smart guy - MS hires people when they need people, not when they have more cash. This can be applied to any large wealthy company.

Two points:

A) If you have extra cash you can afford to invest in new projects which requires hiring new people. If you are short on cash then your more careful about new projects. If you have a very large amount of cash you can afford to blow it on risky R&D.

B) More importantly, in my opinion, is the fact that the more money the government controls the more powerful it becomes---and a government which is too powerful is something to be feared. IMHO, most of the posters on Slashdot lack a healthy fear of the government. The government is the ultimate monopoly---one that can arbitrarily increase its income, has a large standing army, and can come in at any time and take away your freedom.

The more money and power the government has, the more people rely on it, the more it will control our lives. Once the government gets too large and people become too reliant then not even democracy will help since those in power can simply use that reliance to defeat anyone who wishes to change things.

Brian Ellenberger

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[dogbowl]

While I can't deny *everything* you've said, the traits you mentioned above certainly are not unique to Amercians.

Try watching Japanese tourists sometime, or British kids somewhere on the continent to watch a soccer match.

Citizens of every country think they're superior. (and apparently you think so of yourself too)

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[Deathlizard]

In the case of Bill Gates, most of his wealth is tied to the stock market, where he heavily invests. That's why he lost a ton of his wealth when the stock market blew up in 2000.

If he did get some sort of tax cut, it is safe to say that most of it would be invested. Since it's being invested, whatever company he invests in, and not necessiarly Microsoft mind you, would get a benefit and they would be creating the jobs.

It drives me nuts that people actually believe that the rich are all like "Scrooge Mc'Duck" and have a huge 5 story safe where they put all the money in. That may be true for some rich eccentrics, but most wealthy entrepreneurs tend to invest a majority of their wealth in the stock market for the long term.

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[Cymage]

Here is a person that doesn't want to keep more $$$ in their pocket.

Buffett slams dividend tax cut

One of world's richest calls plan 'voodoo economics,' says it puts burden on low-income families.

Quotes: "The 3 percent overall federal tax rate I would pay -- if a Berkshire dividend were to be tax free -- seems a bit light," Buffett wrote.

"Putting $1,000 in the pockets of 310,000 families with urgent needs is going to provide far more stimulus to the economy than putting the same $310 million in my pockets," Buffett added.

CNN

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't give my money to the government, they take it. The greatest powers that the common person has is the right to vote and the ability to spend their money wherever they choose. Government doesn't really listen to the common people except once every four or so years but it listens to business all the time. Businesses, however, MUST pander to the consumer in order to survive. If people stopped buying gas from Exxon, Exxon would be in trouble very quickly, if the government cracked down on them it may take a decade or more to work out -- Valdez anyone? Business must ask me for my money -- they cannot take it. Government can take it. Once I lose that power they no longer have to come to me for my money. Then, I am at the mercy of the state.

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[Rei]

Ah, so high upper class tax brackets are a hindrance on the economy? Gee, you should have told that to the governments of the US during the 1940s, 1950s, and 1960s, when the top US tax bracket hovered between 70-85%, and which (surely by pure coincidence) was our nation's greatest boom time. Then, our top tax bracket starts falling, all the way to below 30% under Reagan (while western Europe's top brackets rise), and (surely by coincidence) Europe's economy gains on the US's by leaps and bounds.

Surely it was a fluke, since you're so insistant that high top tax brackets will ruin the economy.

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[abigor]

You certainly live up to your name.

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[radish]

Formula 1 racing is a team sport, and is probably the most technical in the world. From the car designers, software engineers and mechanics through to the team strategists who plan how much fuel to load and when, with what tyres and how to respond to the actions of the other teams. And that's without even considering the drivers....

IMHO, that qualifies as intellectual.

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[Art_XIV]

A few years ago I spent several months working with a developer who was from Russia. Being a bit of a xenophile, I regularly questioned him regarding Russian life, politics, culture, etc, and was even able to explain a few curiosities of American culture to him.

One day during lunch we found out that we had both been in the Army (not the same Army) at the same time, back when there was still a Cold War. I began to chuckle over the propoganda that the Army endeavored to instill in myself and my fellow soldiers. We had the impression that the Soviets were a bunch of automatons with no respect for human life that were just waiting to go war for any reason. How the Soviets were just dying to use chemical and/or nuclear weapons!

Sergei began to laugh, too, and said 'That's the same sort of thing that they used to tell us about you Americans.'

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[Slime-dogg]

Whoah. Bush is fun to make fun of. It doesn't actually reflect the effectiveness of his governance, nor does his propensity to attract jokes reflect the rebound that our economy has had... He's just easy to make fun of. Nearly every president is.

I'd say that more people have a problem with Ashcroft than Bush, even though John is the result of George's decision-making process. I'd say that Bush has really only made a couple of mistakes:

1. Telling us that there were WMD in Iraq, and that's why we should attack. He should have just told us outright that Suddam was dangerous to everyone, exposed his and France's cheating ways, and then gone after him. Of course, this would be after the whole Afghanistan thing is done. Military action, though politically dangerous, is usually beneficial to the economy, nationalism, and unification of citizens.
2. Putting the power-hungry Ashcroft into his position. The department of homeland defence is sort of redundant, since we're supposed to have a fully functional NSA and FBI. I think Bush was just goaded into creating the new department, but I didn't hear any bitching in opposition at the time.

Everything else... his big ears, his horrible handling of the English language, his slips of the tongue, his appearance of looking stupid, his daughters... they really don't have anything to do with his actual performance as a president.

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[danheskett]

Ok, IANAE (I am not an economist),
Imagine that. A person without economic background trying to tell policy makers what to do.

but from what I understand the "trickle down effect" just doesn't work the way people want it to.
There isn't any thing related to "trickle down" going. Behind the rhetoric is something called Supply-Side economics". It's a serious topic that academics and policy wonks debate.

Giving them even more isn't going to
It's not "giving" them more. It's adjusting everyone's rate equally. For example, if the top rate was 25%, another rate 16%, and the bottom rate 12%, a 50% tax cut would mean that rates were 12.5%, 8%, and 6%. A person making 20,000 year taxed at the bottom rate would go from paying 2400 to 1200, a savings of $1200. A person making 150,000 would go from paying $37,500 to $18,750. That means in political rhetoric terms "The rich were given 94% of the tax cut with the poor only getting 6%" is completely accurate.

big an impact as doing the same to a poorer person.
See, now, that is just silly. If you are trying to get capital back into the marketplace, would you rather send back $1200, or $18,750?

Secondly, the rich still only make up a small percentage of the world's
Yes, but what you don't realize is that the rich pay the VAST majority of income taxes. The top 50% of income earners pay 96% of all income taxes paid. (link).

And lastly, the money spent by a rich person doesn't really trickle down to the needy
Can you trace the history of a rich person from point a to the pocket of poor person b? Of course not. It's a complex system that takes *years* to fall into place. Again, it is way more complicated than I think you can grasp in this situation. Additionally though, it was claimed that the "rich" were going trickle down to the poor.

When they buy up-market products, the money will very quickly "leave" the local area since it's likely to be imported (no matter where they live).
Wrong. The total value of goods and services consumed in the US is 10.40 trillion for last year (link). The trade deficit totals about $200B (link) a year. That means we import more than export. Even if you figure the rich will tend to import more than your average person, it is not reasonable to assume that most of their spending will go overseas.

The money goes to some company, and executive pay is almost universally improportionate to the worker's pay.
This is a major issue: productivity and profitiability are way up, but so far wages are flat. This however has nothing to do with "trickle down". What does happen however is that employment increases. Which is what we have seen. So far this year it is estimated that 1.4 million jobs have been created (link). That is significant.

tax cut for the poor would have made a much better and longer lasting impact to many more people
Here is the little dirty secret that people who don't know what is going on don't realize. The poor in this country pay very, very, very little income tax. If you are literally poor, as in impoverished, you not only don't pay any income tax, you get a refund for taxes you never paid. Yes, that's right. It's an "Earned income tax credit". A tax refund for taxes you never paid (link).

People could pay off debts, get a better education, spend more time with the kids, start a small business, etc.

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[Anonymous Coward]

Be creative and/or change your priorities. I'm guessing that gaining wealth is less important to you than any aspect of your current quality of life. Nothing is wrong with that. It's your choice. But don't think that a lot of rich people didn't sacrifice quality if life for a time to get where they are. Many who made their money through business are workaholics who ruined marriages and families with their priorities. For any given rich person, there is often a very good reason not to envy them. A good rule of thumb is this: if you aren't happy now, you probably wouldn't be happy if you were rich, either.

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[boarder]

First, read this:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=114715& cid=971 6190

Next, think about this:
In the past 20 years, average CEO salaries have gone up 2000% (that's 20 times). How much has minimum wage gone up? Well, back then it was around $4/hour, now it is around $5/hour. Are CEOs 20x better than they were in 1984? Are low income workers not subject to the same laws of inflation as the rest of the country?

A CEO lays off 100 workers to save $2 million per year of a company's money... that CEO then gets paid $2 million per year and gets a golden parachute if he leaves. That sounds like intelligent spending for a company.

Poor people NEED the tax cuts. Rich people do not.

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[Anonymous Coward]

Bullshit. Almost everybody spends everything they earn. It's about discipline. I was saving a larger percentage of my income when I was making under $30K then I am now making about $50K. You have a nice theory, but it doesn't hold up to humans. People want to spend what they have.

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[jcsehak]

The guy making $250K can save $25K a year effortlessly, with zero impact on his family's standard of living.

Says you. Just last week I had to take a commercial flight to my villa in the Bahamas instead of my private jet, because gas prices were just too high and I'm trying to save 10% of my income. Let me tell you, these hard times are affecting everyone.

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[mykingdomforahorse]

I quite disagree. People who are genuinely poor buy food, clothing, and housing, and often do not have enough money to have all 3. Disregarding health care, education,etc. The true sources of "spending money poorly" lie in the rich...expensive cars, big rims, ice statues of Michelangelo's David that urinate vodka, etc etc. What do those really do to drive the economy, and how does that money "trickle down?"

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[tnmc]

> We had the impression that the Soviets were a
> bunch of automatons with no respect for human life
> that were just waiting to go war for any reason.
> How the Soviets were just dying to use chemical
> and/or nuclear weapons!

Substitute "Muslims" for "Soviets" and read today's propaganda. Plus ca change...

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[Otter]

Having posted earlier, I had started thinking along the same lines. When I was a kid, the rightists insisted were facing mortal threat from a merciless, implacable, all-powerful enemy. The leftists insisted it was all a big understanding, they were a superior, peace-loving society acting only in response to our American evil, and that the whole thing was a scam by our moron president and theocratic attorney general to implement a police state.

And those Russian kids told us about a wretched, oppressive society whose primary victims were its own people but which had copied enough Western technology to still be quite dangerous. They, of course, turned out to be entirely correct.

This all sounds oddly familiar. But I still remember going to bed without being certain that the world would still be there the next day, which is why I can't work up the frenzy over today's issues that other people have.

Anyway, that's my Big Thought for Friday. Bring on today's SCO ragefest!

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[bigpat]

"I'd agree with you, and am a big fan of that notion, but the problem is that Microsoft keeps the large majority of their reserves as cash. Which just fucks everything up. They need to start investing/spending."

Cash "equivalents" probably, which include investments in other publicly traded companies. But regardless that cash is definately not just sitting around. It is being used to finance millions of americans spending.

The real problem is that with the concentration of wealth, even the middle class are going into increasing amounts of debt. So, while they aren't leading a lower material standard of living than they otherwise would, they are increasingly becoming indebted to the rich. This sets up an environment where the rich, mostly through corporations and government, exercise undo control over people's lives. This cycle of control has been seen many times before in history and will increasingly become a form of feudalism and slavery.

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[prisoner-of-enigma]

I'm one of the Americans who, while travelling abroad, is as sensitive as I can be to the host country I'm in, and I resent being lumped into a generalized "ugly American" category simply because of the land of my birth. When I was in Germany, I took the time to learn enough German that I could be reasonably functional in my daily travels. I didn't demand everyone speak English to me (although most did, voluntarily, when it became obvious my German wasn't up to the "conversational" level). I did the best I could and asked for no special favors.

It was amazing how accomodating the German's were (this was pre-9/11, though) when they realized I was attempting to meet them half way. I took offense at other Americans who were loud, offensive, and constantly griping about "why aren't the signs written in English so everybody can read them?"

Now, to play devil's advocate for a moment, most Europeans have no concept of what it's like to live in a country as large as the U.S. where English is spoken everywhere. In Europe, a few hours travel in any direction will land you in a completely different country. Unless you live near the Canadian or Mexican border, such things do not happen in the U.S. Most Americans have as little concept of such dense multiculturalism as Europeans have of U.S. geographical and cultural dispersion and uniformity.

But in reality, both sides of this "ugly American" thing are in the wrong. Americans, in general, need to be more observant of foreign cultures. Whether you admire it or not, it's worth learning about at the very least, if for no other reason than it's different. Other nations, on the other hand, need to not pre-judge traveling Americans, treating them with contempt and disdain on sight. After all, aren't the liberal idealogues always griping about how unfair it is when people are stereotyped?

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[carlos_benj]

No. They keep it in a big vault and Bill dives into it every afternoon, emulating his childhood hero Scrooge McDuck....

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[Alzheimers]

Yeah, I know what you mean. It's not like the guy had a movie named after him or anything.

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[TXH-88]

Muslim != Terrorist s/muslim/terrorist

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[plague3106]

Look at the growth we had in the 90's, to which Clinton applied a poor policy that helped in the short run (blowing the bubble), but killed us in the early 2000's (pop!).

I've always found this fasinating. When a democrat is in office, the next term (if republican) feels the effects of his poor decisions b/c it takes time for changes to take effect, but when Bush gives tax cuts to the wealthy, the economy reacts immedately.

So shouldn't any current improvements in the economy be actually due to clinton, b/c it takes time?

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[ThousandStars]

Exactly. Some of the replies make comments about how easy it is to save 10% on 250K; that is true. But it's also easy to save 10% on almost any amount above $20,000 a year. However, what separates the wealthy is their ability to save relative to their income.

If you read The Millionaire Next Door, you'll see guys who study wealth have discovered that most millionaires look remarkably like everyone else. They may act like everyone else too, except that they consume much less than they earn.

Savings and investments are the "secrets" to wealth (which many people confuse with income -- these two concepts are not the same).

Of course, the secret to the "secrets" is that there is nothing glamorous or sexy about them. One can become a millionaire through hard work, thrift, and patience, even on a modest income. Facts like that get less play than "BRITNEY MAKEOVER REVEALED" and such.

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[jcleland]

I have no idea when it's on in the Boston market
Jeopardy is on at the same time, even if you are in a restaurant.

Man, I'm really sorry, I just couldn't help myself...

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[aero6dof]

Yes, but what you don't realize is that the rich pay the VAST majority of income taxes. The top 50% of income earners pay 96% of all income taxes paid. (link).

That seems about right (or a little low), because it seems that the top 50% also control 97.2% of the wealth. (link) A Google researcher goes into it a little more. Following the news I've also continusouly heard about the continuing growth of the gap between the most wealthy and least, but I'm not sure if its real or just a statistical effect.

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[hackstraw]

Actually, I work with a former Soviet citizen, and both of us grew up during the "Cold War". She said that they did not share our fear of nuclear war. Their press and media did not share the same attitude that we had where "At any minute, one of those crazy Commie Russians is gonna push the button and poof the world will be over".

I grew up with this fear. Movies like Red Dawn and The Day After scared the shit out of me.

Back then the Olympics were almost like a war. It was us against them. The highlight was the 1980 US/USSR hockey match for the gold medal.

Then, one day, poof... No more USSR.

Now the government has invented a better enemy. One without borders. One without a clear identity. Gasp, Terrorists.

Now we have a war on terrrorism. WTF? As if there is anything that anyone can do to prevent a bombing. How difficult is it to simply walk across the US/Mexico border or even easier the US/Canada border?

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[be951]

Now the government has invented a better enemy. One without borders. One without a clear identity. Gasp, Terrorists.

Yeah, next thing you know, the government will be telling us those fake terrorists want to bomb U.S. bases, ships and buildings, hijack planes (or maybe a ship), maybe even fly a plane into a building. Those nutty government propagandists!

Seriously, are you one of those conspiracy nuts who think everything is part of the government (or some ultra-powerful "shadow government") master plan to keep us all in line or whatever?

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[danheskett]

Following the news I've also continusouly heard about the continuing growth of the gap between the most wealthy and least, but I'm not sure if its real or just a statistical effect.
I am not so concerneda about the gap. Having wealth leads to more wealth - that's the nature of investment and interest. And as people have wealth and retain it, it will inevitably grow. I am fine with that.

The disparity would be concerning if the rest of the stake holders lost ground, but that is not happening based on the information you provided. The wealth of the "average" and median American continues to grow. It is growing more quickly for the wealthy thanks to compounding returns.

I think the income tax right now is almost just right.

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[jafac]

Bullshit.

Football and Baseball are so ANTI-intellectual, that fans have to INVENT intellectual aspects (like the obsessive-compulsive need for fans to compete on the rote memorization of obscure and trivial statistics - which is really just all about trying to intellectualize the gambling side of sports).

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[rbird76]

In my opinion (I am a liberal, so you can take this with however large a grain of salt you need), GWB has other (legitimate) flaws that have been problematic. A lot of the problem rests in the way that he (and his party) have chosen to do business.

Cheney's secrecy with energy policy, the issues with policy in the EPA that precipitated Whitmam's departure, the loss of GWB's SecTreas and R. Clarke, and the way in which the Republican Congress has approached legislation (including the Patriot Act and the drug insurance act) all point at the issue that I have with GWB; his righteousness. In the Bible (presumably part of where he gets this feeling), righteousness is a good quality, because the operating assumption is that God is absolutely good and that following what He wants is thus infallible. Government and diplomacy operate on a different ethos. Government have abused unbounded power in the past, so openness and accountability are used as ways to evaluate the "righteousness" of a government. In addition, governments are accountable to their people - rather than telling people what they should be, government is there to help people be want they want and to guard the rights of others in the process. GWB and the RP have chosen the most confrontational ways to achieve policy goals and have curtailed the openness that allows people to trust their government.

Ashcroft is disliked, but he is simply an avatar of GWB's approach. GWB wants power, not out of corruption, but because he believes that he knows what is right and wants to do it. In a democracy (or an approximation thereof), this is dangerous, particularly when his manner curtails openness. There is some inconsistency with GWB's stated or implied goals and methods (fiscal conservatism and his spending are not consistent, for example; securing freedom while curtailing its expression and criticizing such expression as anti-American is another) - without openness, one doesn't know whether the inconsistency arises from lack of forethought, honest mistakes, dishonesty or something worse.

Bush's dawdling on security policy before 9/11 was a mistake - I don't think he saw anything coming but he ignored the advice of people who knew there might be a problem and who had no motive to mislead GWB. I haven't read the last Clancy nonfiction book, but its subject criticizes GWB because he ignored the advice of the military and prior art on the potential problems with a "regime change" in Iraq; after three years of pondering, someone might have thought about the consequence of invading a country which supports terrorists (GWB) and/or has one of the largest secret police forces in the world.

In matters of policy, GWB dictates to others what they should do. Not only does this rub people the wrong when he is right, but the consequences of his policy have been mixed and inconsistent with his claims. While being sure is a useful quality in a president, being sure in the presence of contrary evidence without explanation does not lead people to trust him. This certainty has bad enough effects on its own, as above; it probably also leads to the irrelevant jibes at his speech - the mistakes make people wonder why GWB is so certain, and if they mistrust him already, amplifies that mistrust.

GWB is made fun of for some reasons that are unfair, but his manner both provides legitimate reason to question and amplifies the effect of silly mistakes.

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[oiuyt]

To be more accurate, the US/USSR game was in the semi-finals.

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[LuxFX]

Oh, just give that Jeopardy guy a chance. By the time he tops $10 million, the country will be teeming with Brainiac wannabes...

At some point along the way, I picked up this quote from a Slashdot post, that bears repeating (or at least paraphrasing -- and I wish I could tell you who said it):

You know, if we had recruiters for Pharmaceuticals standing outside of colleges offering new graduates 10.2 million over 3 years, then cancer would have been cured 10 years ago. Why do athletes, that contribute NOTHING to society, get paid the most?

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[Anonymous Coward]

The government didn't have to invent the threat, but they are blowing out of proportion the threat, and their ability to stop it. I think that's what he was trying to say. You may disagree, but if so, please answer these questions:

How are you going to stop someone from killing people at random, when they are willing to die to achieve that goal?

Given that you can't stop these fanatics, if the threat was as serious as we are make it out to be with our response to it (curbing our liberties, billions and billions of dollars spent, US Soldiers lives lost, loss of international goodwill and soured relations), if the threat is that serious, why don't we see more activity against Amercians on US soil? It would be easy as hell in the US to get a gun and slaughter people if you didn't care about getting caught. It would be just as easy to suicide bomb people in a public place. So why aren't we seeing that?

Not to minimize the terrorist acts that have been commited, but compare death by terrorism to other causes of death for Americans, and then explain to me how the threat isn't being responded to disproportionately. For help with the stats, look here: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr52/nvsr52_03 .pdf

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[debest]

The highlight was the 1980 US/USSR hockey match for the gold medal.

Not to nitpick too much, but this famous game was NOT for the gold medal, it was a semi-final match. The USA squad still had to beat Finland in the final to get the gold.

Not that we Canadians still don't believe that was just a huge cosmic fluke, and all, but.... ;-)

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[ryanmfw]

Do you think the propaganda is against terrorists or muslims? I, unfortunately, have to say that a lot of propaganda in the media does not mention muslims being terrorists, but does equate them, as, terrorist==muslim. It's sad, but, what can ya do, but read /.?

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[Anonymous Coward]

In the past 20 years, average CEO salaries have gone up 2000% (that's 20 times). How much has minimum wage gone up? Well, back then it was around $4/hour, now it is around $5/hour.

Yes, that's a real problem. Basically, CEOs are stealing money from companies, since to a large extent they determine each others' salaries.

But from that promising start, your logic goes downhill. You conclude "Poor people need the tax cuts. Rich people do not". It just doesn't follow.

We need legislation that catches the corporate thieves. The law should make it possible to charge a CEO with theft if he pays himself 100 or more times the median salary in his company. He or she is a crook. Belongs in prison, not the corner office suite.

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[GooberToo]

I've had this debate before. I don't consider entertainment to be contributing to humanity. It's fleeting at best. I can assure you that I understand the position that you've offered. I'm just not swollowing it.

Not everyone happens to agree with the view that athletes contribute nothing and entertainment is worthless.

As far as sports are concerned, several studies that I've read and/or watched documetataries on, indicate that their popularity stem from neglectful fathers, whereby, sports is the primary mode of emotional attachment to their sons. In turn, their sons grow up mindlessly attached to sports blindly attempting to regain the sole attachment that they had with their father. If anything, the success of sports seems to underline how pethetic and anti-social the average male is. In otherwords, it highlights that sports are a symptom rather than any form of positive social contribution.

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[Suidae]

Why do athletes, that contribute NOTHING to society, get paid the most?

Now, I'm no sportsfan, but to assert that sports are worthless is absurd. One of the most important aspects of society is socialization, and sporting events and teams have a huge influence on that. There are few other events that stimulate as much social interaction as professional sports (of course amature and 'little league' stuff is important too).

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[Dizzle]

If cancer was cured, the pharmaceutical companies would be out of business.

The "good" thing, in terms of interest to the big pharmaceuticals, is that you don't need to catch cancer. People don't catch cancer from other people, they catch it from other stuff such as dangerous activities (smoking and drinking come to mind) or through their genes.

Unless they're curing people's genetic tendencies to form cancerous cells, the pharmaceuticals have a reason to cure cancer. If someone were gauranteed that their cancer could be cured, don't you think they'd be willing to pay a lot more?

A cure for cancer doesn't mean that cancer goes away, just that people don't die from it.

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[N1KO]

According to Adam Smith, supply and demand. It's the same reason why useless diamond rings are more expensive than water, which is essential to live.

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[Zeinfeld]

]Why do athletes, that contribute NOTHING to society, get paid the most?
Now, I'm no sportsfan, but to assert that sports are worthless is absurd

Even if they were useless are they any more useless than others who get paid equally obscene amounts of money? Tiger Woods does way more work in a year than a screen actor. Michael Schmacher, the world highest paid sportsman risks his life every time he takes to the track. Without his services and the services of other great drivers like Fangio before him there would be far, far less demand for Ferraris.

Fisher is a wanted criminal because he broke US law by aiding an abbetting a state who was at the time conducting genocide. The only reason he was being paid $3.3 million was to give the Serbian govt. the appearance of legitimacy.

In the aftermath of WW II, the British hung william Joyce 'Lord Haw Haw' as a traitor for doing the same sort of thing. Fischer deserves what is comming to him.

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[Beardydog]

Is IQ 100 the mean or median? Maybe we're all at 99, and Marilyn vos Savant is propping us up.

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[Master of Transhuman]

When the USEFUL IQ is probably 150, where does this leave you?

Also, intelligence does not equate with either emotional maturity (how well I know!) or rationality. There are a lot of smart, completely irrational, emotionally distorted assholes in the world.

Or even on /. ...

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[akuma(x86)]

You know, if we had recruiters for Pharmaceuticals standing outside of colleges offering new graduates 10.2 million over 3 years, then cancer would have been cured 10 years ago. Why do athletes, that contribute NOTHING to society, get paid the most?

Maybe because curing cancer is several orders of magnitude more difficult than hitting 40 home runs in a season.

The financial rewards are there -- multi-billion dollar rewards await the people that cure cancer. These rewards far exceed what any athlete could ever make.

Putting up million dollar rewards to solve problems like the Hilbert mathematics problems haven't yet yeilded any solutions.

Athletes contribute entertainment value to society and are compensated at the rate the market will bear.

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[ratzmilk]

80% of Humanity is reactive and 20% are proactive. Marketing companies prey on the 80%, as do most of the 20%.

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[ScottGant]

I don't consider entertainment to be contributing to humanity. It's fleeting at best.

I believe that "some" movies and some forms of entertainment certainly contribute to humanity. They are an artform. And as in all forms of art some of it is pure drivel, yet some of it is quite sublime. Novels, paintings, music and yes, movies all do contribute to humanity. If a novel, painting, piece of music or movie changes the way a person sees the world, or even if it makes them think (wow, what a concept that is), then that in itself contributes to humanity.

But I totally agree with you about sports. They're paid the most, and contribute the least. Why do we hold athletes up high and make them our role models? Athletes can even comit some pretty brutal crimes and STILL people's opinions of them are good because they could run the football up the line, or hit that basket at the last second.

Re:Changed the view of the US?

[EvilSporkMan]

100 is average by definition. The test determines your "mental age", which is divided by your real age and then multiplied by 100 to get a nice round number. Practically, anywhere from 90 to 110 is average due to variances in testing and all that jazz. This is according to my World Book Encyclopedia; The Wikipedia article makes no mention of this.

Fisching Trip

[mfh]

> Fischer, indicted by a grand jury in 1992, managed to elude authorities and left a tantalizing trail that included radio broadcasts from the Philippines and sightings in Japan.

So Fischer played a 12 year game of chess against the feds and lost, eh? That's the problem when you run from the law... you can't 'mate 'em, but they can 'mate you in 12.

Re:Fisching Trip

[Anonymous Coward]

It isn't the "mate in 12" he is worrying about, it is the "mate in prison" that is his real problem now.

Re:Fisching Trip

[JosKarith]

"you can't 'mate 'em, but they can 'mate you in 12."
What a coincidence - that's almost certainly what they said to "Shower Bitch Bobby" was told as he was escorted to his cell.

Thank God!!

[Anonymous Coward]

They finally caught that villain! Justice is served!

Re:Thank God!!

[gmletzkojr]

Yes, finally our world will be safe from rogue chess players. Now the US can spend its resources on petty topics, such as the economy, drugs, unemployment, invading other countries, etc, etc.

Well, only non-medicinal drugs.

Re:Thank God!!

[chris_mahan]

Yes, and now that the US has demonstrated its superior manhunting skills against a determined strategist, we'll be getting our miffs on Osama in no time.

Oh, but it was ... In Japan!!!!

Re:Thank God!!

[jadenyk]

Troll

The US spent resources over several years looking for him. They will continue to spend resources in bringing him to the US, providing a fair trial (which will be next to impossible given his statements in the past) and housing and feeding him for the next x years while he sits in prison.

Is he a true criminal? No. The only thing he has actually done that is illegal is play chess in a "bad" (as defined by the US Government) country. His views on terrorism and the attacks suffered by the US (as previously explained) are, unfortunately, shared by people who are still given time on TV, in newspapers and other media outlets. Freedom of speech is a basic right in this country.

IMHO, the US should not bother bringing this guy back to the states and prosecuting him. They should revoke his citzenship and ban him from the US. "If you don't like it here, don't come back!" There is nothing to gain and everything to lose in giving this man a trial.

Re:Thank God!!

[Throtex]

Well of course, your argument makes perfect sense! What better than to let the US Government revoke citizenships without a trial because some guy on Slashdot thinks it's cheaper that way and somehow more exemplary of the values of our Constitution?

Open mouth, insert paranoid foot

[erick99]

I was somewhat surprised to find this in the article:

In radio interviews, he praised the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, saying America should be "wiped out," and described Jews as "thieving, lying bastards." His mother was Jewish.

Behavior like that wont't help his cause regarding his 1992 match that was in violation of UN sanctions.

This is sort of interesting as well. It hints at a greatly inflated sense of self-importance and a little paranoia.

He announced that he had abandoned chess in 1996 and launched a new version, "Fischerandom," a computerized shuffler that randomly distributes chess pieces on the back row of the chess board at the start of each game. Fischer claimed it would bring the fun back into the game and rid it of cheats.

Cheers!

Erick

Re:Open mouth, insert paranoid foot

[gowen]

Fischer claimed it would bring the fun back into the game and rid it of cheats

Thats not entirely it. Fische Random is designed to remove the advantage to be gained from memorising scores and scores of standard openings and to encourage play based on talent rather than preparation.

Re:Open mouth, insert paranoid foot

[October_30th]

Yes.

Here is a more thorough article on Fischer's rise and fall.

Re:Open mouth, insert paranoid foot

[TheCarp]

Well Fischer has always been politically incorrect. This is the same man that accused the russians of ruinin ghte game of chess by always playing for mates against eachother and always playing western masters for the win, and saying that women can't play chess because theres not a woman in the world he couldn't beat given knights odds. (not that there are more than a handful of men that could beat him with knights odds)

As a friend informs me, he had dissapeared back in the 70s because he believed the US government was out to get him. So in his mind he had been in hiding from the US for 26 years before he said that.

I guess the upshot is that we can now all expect a few more good crzy bobby fischer quotes in the near future.

Frankly i think its all pretty bogus. Ok Yugoslavia was under sanctions. Big deal. He went there to play chess. I think this entire mess shows an inflated sense of self importance for the US gov, or at least hypocracy. The UN matters when they agree with US and doesn't matter when they don't?

Hes an old coot who was one of the most well known chess grand masters ever. SO much so that he gave up his title and quit the game years before I was born, and I still know who he was. Just let him be, hes not hurting anyone.

Sure hes an asshole, but should bein gan asshole really be a crime?

-Steve

Re:Open mouth, insert paranoid foot

[rifftide]

Not a bad idea. Memorization of openings has long been a dreary arms race, and machines have way more capacity than anybody else. Maybe they should try it on an exhibition basis during tournaments.

Re:Open mouth, insert paranoid foot

[Xiver]

Ah yes... since some people are not good at, or don't like, preparation / memorization they deem that it is cheating, not fun, and should be somehow removed from the game.

<SARCASM>

I can see that. I don't really like the dribbling part of basketball, maybe it would be more fun if I could just carry the ball across the court.

</SARCASM>

Other than moving pieces to where the should not be, how does one actually cheat at chess?

Re:Open mouth, insert paranoid foot

[JPelorat]

OMG, governments can multitask?! I was hoping the IRS was going to be too busy running IED patrols in Iraq to demand I pay my taxes next year!

Re:Open mouth, insert paranoid foot

[FuzzyBad-Mofo]

Fischer claimed it would bring the fun back into the game and rid it of cheats.

I hate those wankers with aimbots and wallhacking, chess is supposed to be a gentleman's sport for Pete's sake!

Re:Open mouth, insert paranoid foot

[mslinux]

He's very mathematical...probably has asperger's syndrome (high-level autism). These types of people don't have *any* social feelings, or if they do it's very little. It's simply not in their DNA. They don't purposefully intend to piss everyone off, but that's one of the things they do. Nothing personal, it's just how they are.

I have asperger's syndrome. I offend people constantly. I know this, but I can't help it and the fact that they're offended doesn't bother me... not in the least. I've tried to make myself feel bad about my lack of social tact, but I can't.

Re:Open mouth, insert paranoid foot

[AmericanInKiev]

I would suggest that cheating involves getting to the front of the race by some route or means other than sheer force of personal intellect and a life free from intrusion.

"memorizing" openings invented by great minds other than your own is akin to playing Bethoven's fifth - it's really great stuff - but it aint' YOUR stuff.

Think of tic-tac-toe. I know all the openings - I know all the responses - and there isn't any fun left in the game. Admittedly my chess has not matured to that point - but in some circles it has pretty nearly - and I believe this is the fun he's talking about.

Apparently he has got himself a world-class attitude problem. - I feel sorry - seems mostly harmless in spite of his vitriol.

AIK

Re:Open mouth, insert paranoid foot

[Fujisawa Sensei]

His mother was Jewish.

That would also make him Jewish.

Re:Open mouth, insert paranoid foot

[hibiki_r]

You might be a mathematician, but I'm pretty sure you are not a chess player. Most legal opening moves are so bad that a chess player does not have to memorize anything: If somebody opens with something like a3 or g4, any reasonable move will give you an advantage. This is caused by how inmediately obvious most bad moves are. In chess, a really bad move can be "punished" 2 or thee moves later. A more subtle error might be noticeable in 8 moves or so. Compared to a game like Go, where mistakes could not be obvious to an amateur 30 moves later, chess's true complexity is relatively low.

In pro chess you'll never see a truly awful opening move: any move that could be considered a theoretical innovation is tested and retested by a grandmaster before he ever makes it on the board.

As far as known opening lines go, some of the biggest opening families like the Ruy Lopez have known variants well past move 10. More like move 23. Any Grandmaster out there knows all of that theory. Even I, a complete amateur, know more than a couple dozen opening lines past the 8th move.

Re:Open mouth, insert paranoid foot

[pgilman]

" Even I, a complete amateur, know more than a couple dozen opening lines past the 8th move."

dude. if you know more than a couple dozen opening lines past the 8th move, you're hardly a complete amateur. 8-P

Re:Open mouth, insert paranoid foot

[dustman]

You might be a mathematician, but I'm pretty sure you are not a chess player. Most legal opening moves are so bad that a chess player does not have to memorize anything: If somebody opens with something like a3 or g4, any reasonable move will give you an advantage.

First you say that "a chess player does not have to memorize anything", and then you say that you've memorized a couple dozen lines past the 8th move?

I play a lot of chess... Since I signed onto freechess.org in Sep 1997, I have played more than 22,000 games (lots of them were with very fast time controls, or variant games, but still)...

I am still a patzer. The most annoying thing (to me) in a game is just "trying to have fun", play an interesting game, and you run into people with a ton of opening knowledge.

The fun part of chess is figuring things out. Not looking up a move in a book. (It doesn't matter if you've memorized the openings or not... It's essentially the same thing)

I like Fischer Random much more than "normal" chess for this reason.

In pro chess you'll never see a truly awful opening move

There was another slashdot article a few years ago where a British GM was suggesting that he (and others) had probably played Bobby Fischer online, basically just because they got spanked so bad.

Against GMs, this "mystery figure" would do things like his first 8 moves moving every pawn up once, or 1. d3 ... 2. Kd2 ... 3. Kc3 etc..

And even after these horrible openings, this person was still dominating other GMs.

But what about Paul Simon?

[lxt]

...not entirely sure about this one, but didn't Paul Simon violate US/UN sanctions by recording his album Graceland in South Africa? I don't recall anything happening to him over it (then again, I was only around four years old at the time :))...

Re:But what about Paul Simon?

[vidarh]

UN sanctions, yes, but not US sanctions. UN sanctions don't automatically have the force of law. Graceland entered the Billboard Top Album chart on September 8th 1985. On September 26th, Reagan vetoed the bill intended to start US sanctions. On October 3rd the veto was overriden by the Senate... So it was close, and he got some flack for it, though it was largerly silenced because of the focus on black South African music, but he didn't violate US law.

Re:But what about Paul Simon?

[Anonymous Coward]

The cast begs to differ.

Re:But what about Paul Simon?

[blackmonday]

Yes, but nobody realized it was him, he was going under the pseudonym of a guy named "Al". He kept telling people to call him that.

Re:But what about Paul Simon?

[dasmegabyte]

Of course he didn't take much flack. If a guy goes out and records an album for the sole purpose of increasing the awareness of an oppressed culture, you don't fault him for breaking the law you invented to inconvenience the opressors. It'd be political suicide.

chess sanctions?

[Lord Ender]

Perhaps they should start an oil-for-chess program.

Busting him for violating sanctions

[LookSharp]

Kind of like busting Al Capone for tax evasion. The US has to bust him for playing in Yugoslavia in 1992 during sanctions, because since he's lost his mind he's been spreading all sorts of anti-US and anti-semitic propaganda around the world... even praising the 9/11 attacks. And we can't have things like unpopular speech going on during a war, eh? ;)

Sad when a genius has his cheese slide off his cracker.

Re:Busting him for violating sanctions

[Tar-Palantir]

Sad when a genius has his cheese slide off his cracker.

Fischer's always been a nutcase, even back when he was World Champion. Read a decent book on the history of chess (or one specific to him), there are (true) stories about Fischer that you just wouldn't believe. Little things like making the tournament organizers get a chessboard 3 millimeters larger. Flying his favorite chair to the match (in Iceland, no less). Giving up his freakin' World Championship because his insane terms didn't get met.

Basically what I'm saying is, yes Fischer is crazy, but this not new.

Re:Busting him for violating sanctions

[JPelorat]

You realise he's been on the lam for a very long time now, right? That not everything has 'the war' or 'Bushcroft' as a primary cause? That more people freely say much worse than he has every day and nothing happens to them, nor will happen to them?

Re:Busting him for violating sanctions

[yack0]

> Sad when a genius has his cheese slide off his cracker.

Fischer's cheese was never on his cracker. Ever.

Yes, he was/is a brilliant chess player, but other than that he's shown absolutely no positive social graces, a raging ego (into the bad side of ego - some ego good) a sense of vengeance overall and a pretty cracked sense of the world.

I'd even submit that there's a large portion of those who could be 'genius' and are wackos and/or socially inept as well.

(no, not a troll, but I realize I should don the nomex suit)

Re:Busting him for violating sanctions

[LookSharp]

Any generalized racial hatred is always a bad thing, anti-semitism included. Let's not forget that popular mindset in Europe right now appears to be that "Zionist Isreal crushing Palestinians is a very bad thing," and, less formally, "The US rails against 'religious extremists' (Muslims) while a good number of their people (fundamentalist Christians) seem to be equally as extreme."

At least that's my take on it.

Re:Busting him for violating sanctions

[tabdelgawad]

The difference is that Capone's other 'activities' were criminal, but spouting off anti-semitic and anti-American propaganda is not. I really hope this was a routine bust, not a calculated way to silence dissent (even if it's the worst kind of dissent).

Re:Busting him for violating sanctions

[MORTAR_COMBAT!]

Personally I think it's quite sad. Bobby has a serious mental illness of some kind, and as it has run un-checked for so many years he is regarded widely as just being a nut-job. When he mostly just needs to get some psychiatric help.

I think it is a reasonable assumption that:
1. Bobby Fischer will try to defend himself
2. He won't be allowed and his lawyer will find him not guilty by reason of insanity.

Re:Busting him for violating sanctions

[bshroyer]

I don't think that it's the extremism that the "US rails against." It's the actions taken by those extremists.

Every now and again, a "fundamentalist Christian" extremist will shoot an abortion doctor, or keep a harem of 30 wives in a compound in Texas. The railing against Muslim extremists really ramped up when they killed several thousand people a couple of years ago in New York.

I'd go out on a limb and venture that there would be similar railing if Linux zealots started bombing Fortune 1000 companies that employ Microsoft OS fileservers.

Really

[gowen]

How could the submitter fail to title this article

Bobby Fischer Found ... In Japan

Re:Really

[Anonymous Coward]

See the end of this article

The man is clearly mentally unstable

[amliebsch]

There is a fine line between genius and insanity. Bobby Fischer erases that line.

Re:The man is clearly mentally unstable

[amliebsch]

It's because his outspoken political views are not just unpopular, but based on premises that have little relation to reality.

Re:The man is clearly mentally unstable

[jjohnson]

What Fischer calls "cheating" is what others call "chess study". His criticism of the current form of chess is that being a grandmaster involves memorization of openings and endgames more than general strategy and tactics. His particular criticism of the "Russian Chess Machine", as he called it, was that it cheated by having hordes of grandmasters studying chess to back up their contender in a tournament; when there was a break in the game, the contender would meet with his committee of experts and receive the abridged version of their studies. The effect was to multiply the power of the contender because the rote memorization and study was done for him.

Of course, Fischer also accused Russian chess players of throwing games to advance other Russian chess players who'd been picked to be the champion so that their contendor could get to the final round without exerting himself, and be fresh for the championship match, while someone like Fischer had to fight his way to that match and be exhausted when he got there.

Fischer saw the former kind of cheating as an inherent problem in the fixed starting position of the game, and invented Fischerandom (TM) to overcome it. By randomizing the starting positions, book openings become meaningless and chess becomes much more an exercise in pure strategy/tactics and on-the-board analysis.

Deported !!

[hyderabadi]

deported to the United States - that's new!!

Re:Deported !!

[DrWhizBang]

not really. Here in Canada, that's where we send all of our criminals.

Oh, and bad comedians.

So ...

[TheGavster]

We've been hunting a guy around the world for 12 years because he played a chess match in a country we didn't like at the time? Better ship him to Guantanamo - consorting with those chess players who happened to be in Yugoslavia must've been aiding and abetting those terrorists in some way!

Re:So ...

[Tumbleweed]

Hey, what's with this 'Yugoslavia' place? It doesn't seem to be on my map... :)

Re:So ...

[Maestro4k]

• We've been hunting a guy around the world for 12 years because he played a chess match in a country we didn't like at the time?

So that's why the FBI didn't notice what Al Queda was up to, too busy hunting for an insane chess genius!

Nice chap

[ultrabot]

Sound like a guy that could be posting on slashdot, if he only was into computers :-).

A Better Article

[Corbin Dallas]

Can be found at this site.

Interesting.

[Tyranny12]

What this says to me is he is suffering from serious delusions of grandeur, probably
inspired by his need to run and hide for so long and proving himself the second time.

Interesting that the Japanese authorities are

[foidulus]

going to extradite him to the US, but they will not extradite a soldier by the name of Jenkins, who "disappeared" into North Korea while in the US military guarding the 38th parallel some 20 or so years ago. Jenkins married a kidnapped Japanese woman while in North Korea, and will be returning to Japan for a medical checkup soon. I actually don't think they should extradite either of them, but if you are going to do it, at least be consistent...

Re:Interesting that the Japanese authorities are

[Zak3056]

I actually don't think they should extradite either of them, but if you are going to do it, at least be consistent...

Fischer isn't being extradited, he's being deported because his passport isn't valid. There's an important distinction there.

Cheats in chess?

[Gentoo Fan]

He announced that he had abandoned chess in 1996 and launched a new version, "Fischerandom," ... Fischer claimed it would bring the fun back into the game and rid it of cheats.

I think Valve should hire this guy to patch up Counter-Strike.

Pointless Prosecution

[Cavio]

Shouldn't there be some kind of rule against arresting somebody for violating a law that is no longer in effect?

Heck, Yugoslavia doesn't even EXIST anymore. It's kind of a moot point.

Re:Pointless Prosecution

[Rosco P. Coltrane]

Shouldn't there be some kind of rule against arresting somebody for violating a law that is no longer in effect?

No. There's a fundamental principle in law called "retroaction" that says you can't be prosecuted for something you did in the past that contravenes a law that was passed after what you did, the only notable exception being war crimes and genocide (the Nazi atrocities were severe enough that the Nuremberg court simply ignored this rule and tried the Nazi officials with law made up after the fact).

So Bobby Fisher should be tried for violating a law that existed when he did the deed, just as you shouldn't be prosecuted for driving at 70mph on a road that has a 50mph sign today, but had a 70mph sign when you drove on it.

Re:Pointless Prosecution

[Doc Scratchnsniff]

No, there should not. While these particular sanctions no longer exist, other sanctions exist against other countries, and will presumably exist in the future. Sanctions are not an end unto themselves, they are a means of coercing the sanctioned party in some way. This means all sanctions are intended to end eventually. The "violating a law no longer in effect" clause would diminish the effectiveness of sanctions, since potential violators would need only evade discovery until the sanctions are lifted.

A quite extreme example of this is Iraq right now. Should we "let slide" anyone who broke sanctions there? After all, sanctions are lifted now. Of course, if the sanctions had been strictly held to, perhaps they would have actually diminished Saddam's power, instead of increasing it.

Re:Has to be Said...

[dasmegabyte]

I wonder if the Japanese customs agent was clever enough to ask him "Trick or Treat" before slapping on the cuffs.

I can't sympathize

[erroneus]

At this point in the world's history, I cannot sympathize with anyone attempting to use false ID to travel. Further, if it's true, I cannot sympathize with his point of view regarding the senseless murder of thousands of innocent lives.

If his only transgression were for the love of the game, the world would have forgiven him quickly... the court of public opinion would have ruled in his favor. This guy has hosed himself up pretty bad and now he's caught. If it's true that his views are against the people of Jewish faith and that he applauds the horror of 9-11, then the court of public opinion will rule against him if it hasn't already.

I feel that there is a lot more going on than is being revealed though... I've seen crazy in a variety of ways, but there is something really weird about this case.

Re:I can't sympathize

[flossie]

If his only transgression were for the love of the game, the world would have forgiven him quickly... the court of public opinion would have ruled in his favor. This guy has hosed himself up pretty bad and now he's caught. If it's true that his views are against the people of Jewish faith and that he applauds the horror of 9-11, then the court of public opinion will rule against him if it hasn't already.

And since when has public opinion about someone's views been a legitimate means of determining whether or not they should be punished for breaking the law? Did you miss that whole "freedom of speech" bit in the US constitution?

Re:I can't sympathize

[SydShamino]

>> If his only transgression were for the love of the game, the world would have forgiven him quickly... the court of public opinion would have ruled in his favor. ... If it's true that his views are against the people of Jewish faith and that he applauds the horror of 9-11, then the court of public opinion will rule against him if it hasn't already.

He sounds like a stupid jackhole with more ego than higher intellect (with the exception of chess), but I'm still glad the "court of public opinion" has no bearing whatsoever on how he will be tried or sentenced. He opinions on 9/11 or the Holocaust, as stupid as they may be, are still his to say, and they cannot be used to influence his prosecution in a criminal case unless he tries to use them in his defense.

I find it more telling, though, that we'll seek to retain a guy who played a game of chess in the wrong country, while letting one who defected to the wrong country, technically at war with us, then made propaganda films for them, be allowed safe passage just because he's sick. I hope to see consistency, one way or another.

Re:I can't sympathize

[Asic Eng]

Why should playing in a chess tournament be a crime?

Well, I can see that one: it's propaganda support for a country his own country was at war with. (Not that the US had actually declared that war.)

Still whatever he says, and no matter how offensive that is: he hasn't actually hurt anyone. I think even to bother looking for him for 12 years is way over the top.

Re:I can't sympathize

[Roached]

At this point in the world's history, I cannot sympathize with anyone attempting to use false ID to travel.

He apparently thought his passport was valid but it was suddenly revoked which is why he was caught.

If it's true that his views are against the people of Jewish faith and that he applauds the horror of 9-11, then the court of public opinion will rule against him if it hasn't already.

Of course Isreal has not been doing too good in the court of public opinion recently (New Zealand being the latest example). Neither have we since 9-11 has been used as an excuse to further US interests across the world.

I think we conveniently use someone when it suits us (cold war chess hero, make the USSR look bad) and then throw them away when this usefulness is over.

At least I hope this allows Bobby to officially confront the charge and clear himself.

Re:I can't sympathize

[Physics Nobody]

I really hate how this issue keeps coming up after so many years and yet so few people actually have their facts straight. Honestly I don't even care very much anymore, but if you're going to use Clinton as an example you should at least be accurate.

What you never hear in regards to Clinton's famous court appearance is that before 'lying under oath' he asked the judge to define 'sexual relations'. The judge defined it as intercourse. Only after that did Clinton claim he did not have sexual relations.

Now, I will not argue that he was being dishonest. I will not argue that he was being weasely. But lying under oath? If you can't go by the judge's definition of a term then what can you go by?

Re:I can't sympathize

[multimed]

OK so he applied a judge's definition to his answers there. But whose definition was he using when he got in front of a national TV audience & said the same thing? While that very specific definition may have applied during the scope of his testimony, he knew full well that the rest of the country had no such limited connotation.

What to this day still upsets me is the limousine liberal mentality that some how the rules don't apply. Most of the same people who fought so hard for society to take seriously sexual harassment and in particular, women taken advantage of by their bosses or other men in authoritative positions, were so quick to completely excuse and defend Clinton for doing it. And no it's not relevant that she was a willing participant--he was the President of the United States and she was an intern!

Re:I can't sympathize

[TamMan2000]

But whose definition was he using when he got in front of a national TV audience & said the same thing? While that very specific definition may have applied during the scope of his testimony, he knew full well that the rest of the country had no such limited connotation.

I agree it was slimy of him, but was it illegal? If bold face lying to the american public was an impeachable offence, I have no doubt that every president since Carter (and probably him as well), would have been impeached.

US Hypocrisy

[fpga_guy]

From the article:

U.S. authorities accused him of violating U.N. sanctions imposed against Yugoslavia by playing the match.

Yeah 'cos we all know about the US's unwavering respect for the UN...

But only when it suits...

Re:US Hypocrisy

[b-baggins]

Oh, for crying out loud. Are you seriously maintaining the asinine argument that putting a brutal, oppressive, murdering, dictatorial regime as the Chair of the Human Rights Commission is no big deal because there is no nation in the world with a perfect record on human rights?

Finally safe

[xs650]

Now that Martha Stewart and Bobby Fischer have both been aprehended, I feel much more secure.

Somewhat OT: Hatley High

[~Socrates]

I just couldn't help myself but think of the movie Hatley High when I saw this newsitem. I thought it was a great movie about chess and would like to reccommend it to all :).

imdb link

Jesus!

[mfh]

Did you listen to the whole thing? He's fucking nuts! I guess there is such a thing as being too intelligent. I just thought that if you were intelligent, you'd be smart enough to know where the straw men are. He said the Holocaust was a hoax, among other really scary things.

Re:Jesus!

[mirko]

So, he's nuts, but did he kill anybody, how does this make him more dangerous than, say, some starving homeless guy with a knife ?
And his views on history are his, which mean I do not give a fuck about conspiracy theorists as well as their opponents...
Glorify him for what he is : a chess genius and do not publish things about what you think he doesn't do well enough.

Re:Jesus!

[lseltzer]

And he was fucking nuts back in 72 as well. He's always been paranoid. He went apeshit before the 72 tournament refusing to play if there were any cameras or recording devices in the room. I believe he forfeited at least one game because he imagined there was a camera there.

I was 11 years old at the time but I remember it pretty clearly. I was aware back then that he was kooky anti-semite.

Re:Jesus!

[Anonymous Coward]

A lot of top players are nuts. Korchnoi claimed opponents were using mind control on him. Morphy became a paranoid recluse. Euwe wore gloves while playing his games. Alekhine was world champ for many years but noone claimed his body when he died. Its a lonely occupation and the top players seem to have no other interests.

Re:Jesus!

[The Almighty Dave]

If I remember correctly, in addition to being intelligent and somewhat crazy, wasn't there some talk a while back about him being autistic, or at least showing some traits of autism?

Re:Jesus!

[lseltzer]

You're right. He did make a stink and demanded the cameras be removed (see this page for lots of details).

Re:Jesus!

[Toadpipe]

Seeing as most autistics tend to be very very good with mathmatics, him being a chess genius and an aut would make a bit of sense.

His paranoid conspiracies aside, the only thing this man did that was illegal was play a chess game in a country we didn't like. Not exactly a dangerous criminal mastermind. Just a guy would played a game in violation of sanctions.

This is total bullshit, Bobby Fisher should be freed.

Re:Jesus!

[Colonel Cholling]

Seeing as most autistics tend to be very very good with mathmatics

A lot of people believe this, probably due to the popularity of the movie Rain Man, but the fact is that so-called "idiot savants" are fairly rare among autistics. Most autistics do not have exceptional mathematic abilities.

Re:Jesus!

[Rei]

No, he didn't kill anyone - although, in response to September 11th, he told a Philippine radio station:

"I was happy? ?Yes, I applaud the act? ?Fuck the US. I wanna see the US wiped out. "

I'm just waiting to hear him blame his detention on Japanese Jewish operatives. ;) You know, Bobby, I'm not too fond of Israel's policies in the middle east, either. However, when you take things as far as, say, blaming the confiscation of your property in absentia by the government on "the Jews", you might as well be working to rebuild the Fourth Reich. Lets close with one of Bobby's quotes:

"I'm hoping for a [scenario] where the [US] will be taken over by the military, to close down all the synagogues, arrest all the Jews, execute hundreds of thousands of Jewish ringleaders, and you know, apologize to the Arabs by killing off all the Jews over there in that bandit state, you know, Israel."

Sieg heil, Bobby. Sieg heil.

Re:Jesus!

[Deathdonut]

While he didn't willingly concede a game, he was warned that if he kept making silly demands (such as removing the first 7 rows of spectators, changing the lighting, de-glossing the chessboard, etc) the game would be forfeit. He continued, and the second game of the match was awarded to Spassky. The third game (and his first win of the match) was played in a secluded room to placate him. After the third match, he stopped being the one making insane demands and the Russians started taking apart light fixtures, filling bags with 'air samples' and accusing Fischer of using electronics to interfere with Spassky's brainwaves.

Re:Jesus!

[mirko]

Sounds a drunkard to me, I don't applaud but I don't hate him, simply because I do not care.
The fact is that is being jailed because he fucking attended a chess match in a country when his country law forbid it...
So, it was forbidden to have an innocent play somewhere...
I guess he's as extreme as that law sounds like the system he grew in was.

Re:Jesus!

[JustAnotherReader]

If I remember correctly, in addition to being intelligent and somewhat crazy, wasn't there some talk a while back about him being autistic, or at least showing some traits of autism?

I have a nephew who is autistic. Autism is an overwhelming syndrome that generally restricts the person who has it to only the most basic level of communication. More likely Fischer has symptoms of Asperger's syndrome.

With Asperger's syndrom a person will often be quite intelligent but have some difficulty communicating verbally. They can speak, but they come off as being very shy. They tend to be focused on patterns and sequences (quite a talent to have for a chess player). They also tend to "self stimulate" by self hugging and/or rocking back and forth.

All these symptom also appear in autistic children but with autism the ability to speak and communicate normally is quite often lost. They sometimes also tend not to bond with people. I know there was a time when my nephew didn't seem to understand that he had to relate to the people in his family differently than he relates to a chair. Also, autism tends to strike male children at about 18 months to 2 years old. It's not a syndrome that get worse as you get older. You have it or you don't.

Fisher can obviously speak well. His thoughts may be delusional, but he doesn't have the speech issues or physical movement issues normally associated with autism.

Re:Jesus!

[untaken_name]

Heheheheh. Nice troll. Forbidden to have an innocent play? Of course he wasn't. He wasn't told that he couldn't play chess in that country, merely that he could not play in a sanctioned tournament in that country. It's a bit of a distinction. It sends a message, and please make no mistake: Bobby Fischer knew exactly what he was doing. He sent the message he wanted to send, and while you may think that the reaction was too harsh, please do not make it like all he wanted to do was play a friendly game of chess.

Re:Jesus!

[Scarblac]

An innocent play? There were economic sanctions against Yugoslavia for the civil war and genocide in Bosnia(*) that was supported by the Yugoslavs. Fischer netted $3.5 million for what amounted to a propaganda operation. He was convicted by a US jury, and I can see why.

(*: I'm not 100% sure if it was exactly that part of the war, or another conflict at the time)

Re:Jesus!

[operagost]

Actually, it wasn't just the U.S. that forbade it, it was a U.N. sanction. Essentially, the whole world forbade it.

Re:Jesus!

[be951]

Yeah, that whole family is bad news. Didn't he have a sister named Amy that just got out of jail or something?

Re:Jesus!

[Muerte2]

While I agree with you that Mr. Fischer is a little extreme with regards to his political reviews, that's his right. You can say all the crazy whacked out things you want, even things that aren't true. That's what freedom is speech is all about. That's what this country is founded on. It's only when you begin to act on these feelings that you run afoul of the law.

There are certainly other people just like him living free in the US spouting just as much insane madness, but they're not being investigated by the feds. If you don't believe me have a walk through downtown USA outside a homeless shelter. Having a contrary opinion is NOT a crime. If it were all of us /F?OSS/i people would probably be in jail. If Mr. Gates had his way anyway.

Re:Jesus!

[untaken_name]

I don't know. I would see anyone who participated in a formal tournament (supposedly representing the US) in a sanctioned country as supporting that country's actions. This is especially true when that person has been told that the US would not like to be represented. If China actually holds the Olympics, I would hope that the U.S. would boycott in protest of China's massive human rights violations. If they do not, I will see the US teams, and by extension the US government, as condoning that country's actions. If you allow countries that are human rights abusers to have the appearance of legitimacy, you give their actions that appearance. Thing is, he could have just gone over there and played however much chess he wanted to with the people. He could have declared his support of that government's actions. That was not forbidden to him. It was only playing in a sanctioned tournament, where he would be representing the US, that was off-limits. Appearance is key here, as he would not actually represent the US's official stance, but would have that appearance to the rest of the world. This is quite simply because he is an American, and the tournament sanctioned. I think that US citizens should be allowed to travel to Cuba legally, for example, however I would not support the US putting a team in a sanctioned event there. I realize it's a fine distinction, but it is there.

Re:Jesus!

[mirko]

If you allow countries that are human rights abusers to have the appearance of legitimacy, you give their actions that appearance.
Actually, the US are under Human Rights Watch focus for Guantanamo's excess, but we sent people play tennis in Los Angeles, though, does this make us corroborate Iraq's invasion ?
No : it's a game, a proof we support the people under the Power.

He could have declared his support of that government's actions. That was not forbidden to him. It was only playing in a sanctioned tournament, where he would be representing the US, that was off-limits. Appearance is key here, as he would not actually represent the US's official stance, but would have that appearance to the rest of the world.
Fisher is a Chess player, not a diplomat. Fox and CNN legitimated that WMD joke, why would they leigitimate Fisher's delirium ?

No, respect your 1st amendment and let him bark, it's not as dangerous as intelligency evasion or terrorism conceiling.

Re:Jesus!

[Smallpond]

There was no US law against what Fischer did. Bush Sr. wrote an executive order forbidding US citizens from doing business in Yugoslavia. This assumes that the US executive branch has jurisdiction over its citizens while they are not on US soil. What is the legality of that?

Also, he was not convicted by a US jury, he was indicted. To the best of my knowledge we still have an innocent until proven guilty system.

Re:Jesus!

[maxpublic]

He wasn't told that he couldn't play chess in that country, merely that he could not play in a sanctioned tournament in that country. It's a bit of a distinction.

I see. And somehow that's supposed to make the whole thing less absurd?

The man is being charged with playing in a chess tournament when his fuckwit government ordered him not to. As insane as the son-of-a-bitch is, the government had no business pulling this totalitarian temper tantrum in the first place.

It doesn't matter what his views are. It doesn't matter if Hitler is his hero. All that matters is that the government over-extended it's authority and attempted to illegally shackle one of it's own citizens. For try as I might, I see no Constitutional authority granting the government the right to command it's citizens as to which countries they might go to, and what they might do while they're there.

Max

Now That Kevin is Free.....

[tailgate]

Now that Kevin is free, when will ThinkGeek be selling the free Bobby shirts?

So we can find Bobby Fischer but...

[jogoodma]

...we can't find those damn WMD's?

great article on Fischer

[paulydavis]

I wanted to submit this link when i submitted the story but it was an afterthought. It is a great story on what Fischer has been up to in the alantic monthly. story>/A>

He sort of makes sense to me...

[Anita Coney]

While I'd never condone terrorist activity, I too would hate a country that tried to arrest me for simply playing chess. As an American I'm utterly embarrassed.

I know another man...

[No. 24601]

who was a champion for the US during the Cold War. He's now the most wanted man in the world.

Re:I know another man...

[Xiver]

Osama Bin Laden was never a champion for the US.

Like many allies we once had a common enemy.
Even then he viewed the US as infedels to be dealt with later.

Re:Why does this mean so much?

[Maqueo]

Up until Bobby Fisher Russia had been the reigning chess champion... well forever (with the exception of some european / cuban[!] players the beginning of the century). Not only the fact that he won in a time of political tension, but also played REALLY brilliantly was quite an amazing feat. He remains one of the greatest players all-time, and his matches against Spassky continue to be studied nowadays by chess aficionados everywhere. It also seems the KGB tried to pull several dirty tricks in order to help Spassky to win, without luck. If you have an interest in chess, check out some of his games. Amazing style (although I prefer Alekhine :P )

Hypocritcial??

[Anonymous Coward]

They have a problem because he broke UN sanctions to go to Yugolavia to play chess?

Didn't America and Britain go against the UN's wishes to send several thousand troops to Iraq to play war?

Re:yugoslavia neighbour of bosnia?

[REBloomfield]

Bosnia was one of the six federal units that made up the former Yugoslavia, but gained independence in the early 90's.

Murray Head saw this coming...

[angst7]

Japan. Oriental setting
and the city dont know what the city is getting...
The creme de la creme of the chess world
and a show with everthing but Bin Laden.

Time flies! Doesn't seem a minute
since Yugoslavia had the chess boys in it
All change dont you know that when you
play at this level its no ordinary venue?

In New York or Afganistan or Iraq... or this place!

One night in Tokyo and all jews are bastards...
Not much between self hate and insanity
You'll find a spook in every karaoke bar
and if your lucky you've still got your qeeen
I can feel deportation creeping up on me.

(ok, so the execution was weak, but you get the idea)

Terrible Idea!

[Pii]

We can't have him down in Guantanimo, tutoring terrorists in the finer points of chess...

If bad people become chess masters, the terrorists win!

What's wrong with you people?

[Cecil]

There are altogether too many people on this story commenting what basically amounts to, "Oh, he's a crackpot anyway, who cares?"

IT IS NOT OKAY TO ARREST PEOPLE FOR BEING CRACKPOTS.

You can be locked up because you're insane, but only if you're a danger to yourself or others. I consider this a valid criteria. Bobby Fischer, despite doing things that you might consider insane, is in no way a danger to himself or to others, unless you consider it dangerous to hear things you don't like. And if you do, too bad, it doesn't make it true.

Leave this man alone. He hasn't done anything substantially criminal. It's not like he was shipping food in violation of sanctions to the poor Yugoslavians or anything.

Re:What's wrong with you people?

[Anonymous Coward]

he is using fake ids to travel?

that is a pretty decent crime.

the fact he is a crackpot just makes him more interesting.

but the japanese arrested him, for a REASON, he broke the law.

Re:What's wrong with you people?

[Anthony Boyd]

Leave this man alone. He hasn't done anything substantially criminal.

Substantially? Who gets to define that?

Re:What's wrong with you people?

[kirkjobsluder]

Leave this man alone. He hasn't done anything substantially criminal. It's not like he was shipping food in violation of sanctions to the poor Yugoslavians or anything.

Actually, the exhibition match was a big deal for Yugoslavia drawing in thousands of people with money to spend into the local economy. In the process, Fischer pocketed a goodly sum just for showing up. Now, certainly we can debate at length whether said sanctions were a good idea, but arguing that "it was just a chess match" or that it was not a criminal act is missing the point. I'm much more sympathetic to Americans engaging sister-cities programs in Cuba who face the same penalties than the star of what many argue was THE chess event of the 1990s.

Another facet behind this story is that it is not as if Fischer is being persecuted here. He's been living comfortably overseas for over a decade. The maximum penalty he faces is 10 years and $250,000. If he behaves himself, he could probably get away with a token fine and public service. There was no big manhunt. Although his probable where abouts have been known off and on for the last 10 years, we have placed no public pressure on the countries he lived in to capture him. He was detained and deported on a routine problem with his passport. For the most part, it seems as if the U.S. had written Fischer off as a loss, and was willing to let him live as and expatriate.

Fischer's sentence

[justkarl]

He's probably going to jail, right? Just think of his roomate...

"Hey, buddy, wanna play chess?"

"No, Bobby, we've played chess 12 times since breakfast."

I'd probably kill a man to learn chess from Bobby Fischer in jail.

That's interesting....

[theJerk242]

wanted since 1992 for playing a tournament in Yugoslavia despite U.N. sanctions

So this guy is in trouble for playing chess, while George W. Bush Jr. isn't (for waging an agressive war without the consent of the UN). It just goes to prove something....if you are going to go against the will of the UN, then do it big. And, also, make sure that your have the worlds strongest military backing you. After all, the U.S. military makes up a large chunk of the UN peacekeeper forces.

Re:That's interesting....

[theJerk242]

Is there anything that you don't blame Bush for? When you have no better argument, just work in some good old fashioned Bush bashing. Fucking troll.

You are mistaken. I did not intend to bash Bush. I don't care for him but I don't hate him. I'm just bashing how screwed up the UN's sence of justice is. UN law states that waging an agressive war against the consent of the UN is punishable by being put on trial at the Haige (excuse my spelling). In other words, you will be punished as a war criminal. George W. Bush Jr. did exactly that. I'm not sayiny that Bobby Fischer is a saint either. After all, he went against the UN will by playing a chess in Yugoslavia. So in summary, which is the greater evil, a chess player or a war criminal? I was just trying to point out the irony of how the UN is supposed to prevent wars from happening by punishing those who do cause agressive wars but instead put more effort into punishing someone who was merely playing chess.

Re:That's interesting....

[mabu]

It was also against US sanctions. Whatever you may think of the Iraq war, I think it's safe to say that there was no US law explicitly forbidding it.

Take a look at the Constitution and the War Powers Act. Think again.

Technically speaking, the president is not granted the authority to declare "war" and Congress does not have the ability to arbitrarily give such authority to the executive branch. Bush's "war" was definitely un-Constitutional, and likely illegal.

Clearly....

[zandermander]

You've never had to escape from people bent on killing your entire ethnic group.

Not that I have, mind you, but I would think you have heard of the Holocaust, Cambodia (ever see The Killing Fields?), Rwanda and even what went on in South Africa for so long.

At this point in the world's history, I cannot sympathize with anyone attempting to use false ID to travel.

I don't know about you but if were being persecuted and all I needed to do to escape harm was to use a false ID, I think I'd choose the false ID.

Sometimes the right thing to do is to ignore and/or willfully break stupid laws.

Sorry for sounding so harsh but that part of your comment was pretty dumb. Seeing mountains of skulls in Cambodia has a way of changing your point of view.

Mentally Ill

[Black-Man]

His mother was Jewish, yet Jews are "lying, stealing bastards"? He's so intelligent, he uses phrases only illiterate morons would use?

He needs locked up all right... in the mental ward.

Re:Mentally Ill

[CyPlasm]

From this article:

Contrary to popular belief, Fischer didn't emerge from the womb a full-blown grand master. While he was learning the game, as a child in Brooklyn, he was essentially a hotshot club player--a prodigy, to be sure, but not obviously world-championship material. But at age thirteen, in 1956, Fischer made a colossal leap. That year he became the youngest player ever to win the U.S. Junior Championship. He also dominated the U.S. tournament circuit. What was astounding wasn't simply that a gawky thirteen-year-old kid in blue jeans was suddenly winning chess tournaments. It was the way he was winning. He didn't just beat people--he humiliated them.

Maybe the onset of puberty "turned on" his mental illness. This article and others seem to suggest that puberty can trigger an underlying mental condition. In fact, this article says:

Social phobia is the irrational fear and avoidance of being in a situation in which a person's activities can be watched by others. In a sense, it is a form of "performance anxiety," but a social phobia causes symptomsthat go well beyond the normal nervousness before an on-stage appearance. People suffering social phobias intensely fear being watched or humiliated while doing something--such as signing a personal check, drinking a cup of coffee, buttoning a coat or eating a meal--in front of others. Many patients suffer a generalized form of social phobia, in which they fear and avoid most interactions with other people. This makes it difficult for them to go to work or school, or to socialize at all. Social phobias occur equally among men and women, generally developing after puberty and peaking after age 30. A person can suffer from one or a cluster of social phobias.

Sounds like Mr. Fischer to me!

Re:Mentally Ill

[ajs]

Ok, I didn't listen to the recording (will try to get a chance later), but I'm curious: did he say anything that was actually antisemitic or did he just express the opinion that the holocaust was a hoax? The latter is almost certainly an incorrect opinion (I've met too many people who were there or whose parents were there not to believe), but holding that opinion does not make one an antisemite... obviously, it is in the political favor of an antisemite's arguments to hold such an opinion, and for their opponents to label anyone who holds such an opinion as either a crackpot (probably true) or antisemite (unfounded).

However, I would think that this late in the game, we would understand the difference.

Worse, labeling someone who doesn't acknowledge that tragedy as being against any one group devalues the lives of the other groups (e.g. homosexuals, Gypsies and political prisoners) who were killed.

Re:Mentally Ill

[McDutchie]

If he has a social phobia that was severe, why was he in one of the mostly densely populated countries in the world? Just walking in Narita International Airport would have been a major challenge for him.

Well, no... you don't interact with any of those people, nor would any of them be particularly watching you. In fact, being anonymous in a crowd is the easiest way for a socially phobic person to be "among people".

Re:Mentally Ill

[paganizer]

sounds like a democrat.

Re:Mentally Ill

[banzai51]

Care to point out where Bobby Fischer was arrested for what he said? Or was he arrested for what he did?

Re:Mentally Ill

[hexatron]

I take this opportunity to trot out my own Fischer anecdotes:

I went to high school with him, except that he didn't attend it much. The only time I saw him was in a gym class. This class had about 250 kids in it (very big city school), and mostly we just sat around the walls and talked--a few more athletic types played basketball, and the teacher, as I remember, took attendance and hid.

One day, Bobby Fischer showed up in this class, wearing street clothes (the other gym ritual was changing into white shorts, a white teeshirt (no printing on it--this is in antedeluvian 1958) the smelliest socks imaginable--never washed, abandoned at the end of the year--and Converse-style sneakers.

So Fischer starts walking through this mass of sullen teenage humanity, and a big freckley Irish kid follows him around, loudly challenging him to a chess match. Fischer finds the teacher, gets whatever signature he needs, and starts walking back to the door. At this point, the Irish kid decides he is the new world chess champion by default, and declaims this loudly in Bobby's ear.

My high school girl friend went to elementary school with Fischer--it was some little private school. She said that in the fifth grade, if he lost a game (probably basketball) during the lunch break, he would go home for the afternoon.

Lame excuse.

[miffo.swe]

Land of the free my ass. This is just an example of how the US misuse laws to detain uncomfortable people. Im just waiting for Michael Moore to be imprisoned for using the wrong kind of sunblock.

How is it that in the US you can say pretty much anything about muslims but call Israel (not jews as a group, the country damnit!) something you are toast? Free speech cant be selective you know.

Give the Poor Guy a Rest (not Arrest)

[Teancum]

While Bobby Fischer might have technically violated some U.S. laws, (and this one technicality is just the first that he has dealt with) he really should simply be left alone.

I've been following Bobby Fischer since he started publishing Chess columns in Boys' Life. While not necessarily a hacker, certainly a classic geek.

He all but dropped out of society in almost a Ted Kaczynski fashion, and can IMHO be classified as the most persecuted American by the U.S. Government. He was also wanted a few years ago on tax evasion charges, but I thought that got cleared up. He really has been hounded by the U.S. government for many things, and gone through ups and downs in his life that I would not wish on anybody.

A really good writeup about Bobby Fischer's trip to Yugoslavia is on bobbyfischer.net

I had to use the internet wayback machine because for some reason the regular website is down. Probably due to some slashdotting, although in this case probably not directly due to slashdot it self (surprisingly). Some absolutely incredible articles. I've also seen segments on television news programs that have also discussed his life, and it seems rather pathetic. How much of this is brought onto himself, and how much is out right presecution remains to be debated, but he should really be given a nice quite spot in Montana and be left alone.

Maybe the U.S. government is afraid of letting intelligent people who think the U.S. government is screwed up be left alone.

Re:Give the Poor Guy a Rest (not Arrest)

[Anonymous Coward]

Whoa whoa whoa, why does he have to be my neighbor? Since when did Montana become the little "out of the way" place to store your undesireables? First you send us Californians and movie stars, and now you're sending hate filled nutcases. That's on top of the wack-jobs we already have here. Damnit! Montana is NOT the Australia of the U.S.!

I say we give Bobby a quiet little spot right next door to you.

Re:Give the Poor Guy a Rest (not Arrest)

[CXI]

The post I replied to brought up the reason itself. Ted Kaczynski. I let you figure the rest out (as if it isn't obvious).

New Movie

[hoborocks]

I expect "Searching for Bobby Fischer II: Bobby Fischer strikes back" and "Searching for Bobby Fischer III: Return of Bobby Fischer" to follow - it makes sense here too, since II would be about his comments and random antagonization, and III would continue from today.
Unless they'd rename the first one to #4, then continue with 5 and 6, and have the first three be about his childhood....

The possibilities are endless!!!

Sanction info

[tambo]

Wow. 238 comments at present, and yet no one (including the OP) has provided information about the sanction? You guys are slacking...

I dug up some information:

On September 1, 1992, Bobby Fischer came out of his 20 year retirement and gave a press conference in Yugoslavia. He pulled out an order from the U.S. Treasury Department warning him that he would be violating U.N sanctions if he played Chess in Yugoslavia. He spit on the order and now faces ten years in prison and a $250,000 fine if he returns to the U.S. In addition, he must forfeit his $3.65 million to the U.S. Treasury and forfeit 10% of any match royalties earned. On September 30, Bobby Fischer began his rematch with Boris Spassky in Sveti Stefan, Yugoslavia. The match was organized by banker Jedzimir Vasiljevic. On November 11, Fischer won the match with 10 wins, 5 losses, and 15 draws. He received $3.65 million for his winnings and Spassky received $1.5 million.

And I found the letter from the Senate that explains the basis for the sanction:

Department of the Treasury
Washington
Aug 21, 1992
Order to Provide Information and Cease and Desist Activities

FAC No. 129405

Dear Mr Fischer:

It has come to our attention that you are planning to play a chess match for a cash prize in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro) (hereinafter "Yugoslavia") against Boris Spassky on or about September 1, 1992. As a U.S. citizen, you are subject to the prohibitions under Executive Order 12810, dated June 5, 1992, imposing sanctions against Serbia and Montenegro. The United States Department of the Treasury, Office of Foreign Assets Control ("FAC"), is charged with enforcement of the Executive Order.

The Executive Order prohibits U.S. persons from performing any contract in support of a commercial project in Yugoslavia, as well as from exporting services to Yugoslavia. The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the performance of your agreement with a corporate sponsor in Yugoslavia to play chess is deemed to be in support of that sponsor's commercial activity. Any transactions engaged in for this purpose are outside the scope of General License No. 6, which authorizes only transactions to travel, not to business or commercial activities. In addition, we consider your presence in Yugoslavia for this purpose to be an exportation of services to Yugoslavia in the sense that the Yugoslav sponsor is benefitting from the use of your name and reputation.

Violations of the Executive Order are punishable by civil penalties not to exceed $10,000 per violation, and by criminal penalties not to exceed $250,000 per individual, 10 years in prison, or both. You are hereby directed to refrain from engaging in any of the activities described above. You are further requested to file a report with this office with 10 business days of your receipt of this letter, outlining the facts and circumstances surrounding any and all transactions relating to your scheduled chess match in Yugoslavia against Boris Spassky. The report should be addressed to: The U.S. Department of the Treasury, Office of Foreign Assets Control, Enforcement Division, 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Annex - 2nd floor, Washington D.C. 20220. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact Merete M. Evans at (202) 622-2430.

Sincerely, (signed)
R. Richard Newcomb
Director
Office of Foreign Assets Control

- David Stein

Re:Sanction info

[stienman]

For those keeping track of world events, those are essentially the same sanctions against Cuba. Many people say that it's illegal to travel there, but that's false - travelling there is fine - you just can't spend any money there.

-Adam

Next Stop for Fisher, Guantanamo.

[Bob_Robertson]

Obviously an Enemy Combatant. Put the trator in irons!

But seriously, let the guy live his life as he sees fit. Has he hurt anyone?

Bob-

Oh please, way to pat yourself on the back...

[raehl]

He's saying that people who play chess well need to be way smarter than people who play football well. Is playing football a more intellectual activity than say, tennis? Maybe, for certain positions.

But there are plenty of really stupid pro football players. I don't know any really stupid chess players.

Anyway, most sports are not really that intellectual at all - maybe in the COACHING aspect of it, and the analysis aspects (you can analyze snail movement if you'd like to, and do it in a way only smart people would be able to handle), but when you're PLAYING, it's performance is less "intellectual" than ingrained, trained responses.

Learning to play most sports is a matter of learning the rules of how to play (through coaching) along with practice to make following those rules natural. It's not intellectual, it's memorization.

You can't memorize all of chess - once you're a few moves in, you're going to have to figure out, right then, what the best move is.

Re:Oh please, way to pat yourself on the back...

[evan_th]

I disagree. There is a lot of memorization involved in chess - attack and defensive strategies. I know that it takes a lot of improvisation and personal technique once you get farther into the game but being able to recognize these and utilize them during a game is very important to any serious chess player.

Re:Oh please, way to pat yourself on the back...

[BootSpooge]

I don't know any really stupid chess players.
You've never played me.

Re:Great Movie

[Zebbers]

dude, that movie has pretty much nothing to do with bobby fischer, except in the fact that the kid is nothing like him.

You know you're a nerd when....

[Vic]

And the hot-swapping of players while play is in motion adds a whole other dimension to the game

.....you refer to a "line change" as "hot swapping". I'll have to remember that one! ;-)

Cheers,
Vic

Re:Interesting read

[arivanov]

The links from there make an even more interesting read. Especially this quote from a BF interview:

Bobby Fischer: But it was in violation, apparently, of an order, an executive order which President Bush had signed, uh, I think in around May of 1992, that forbid Americans to, uh, do business with Yugoslavia, unless, of course, they had permission or an exception from the government, which I didn't get. Everybody got it. CNN gets it, all these Jew controlled outfits get it, and you know, you know how many people were involved in that match, nobody was indicted? Spassky wasn't indicted, he played. The [...] government didn't indict him. And I'll tell you something else about Spassky. He played in that match, nobody indicted him. That guy has been to the U.S. at least a few times since the match. He can go to the U.S. Nobody touches him. He played in the match just like me. The U.S. government doesn't give a damn about arresting him. They only want to arrest me. Eugene was over there. He made a nice pretty penny there. The Philippine government doesn't wanna put him in jail. There were a lot of people involved in that match. Nobody wants to put anybody in jail but me. They wanna put me in jail cause the Jews are behind all this. They're behind everything. They're orchestrating everything, this, uh, indictment, this movie, the forged Batsford edition of My 60 Memorable Games, this fake forged book, called umm uh, I mean CD-Rom called Bobby Fischer Teaches Chess. Now they're behind this mega-robbery of all my stuff at the Pasadena storage house, the robbery and auctioning off of all this stuff. You know, they grabbed this stuff on the cheapest, meanest trick. The most transparent ploy you can imagine. This fuckin Elsworth, deliberately, they used a secret Jew I'm sure...deliberately, behind my back, just stopped paying for six months. I sent him the check. You saw the check, Pablo.

While the interpretation is rabid paranoia, the facts are definite. CNN made billions in advertisement time warmongering in ex-Yugoslavia. We used to stage bets where the next shootout will be based on where their crew went. Spasski was never indighted for the embargo. Noone dealing with any chess material from the games was indighted either

Re:am I reading this straight?

[looie]

The UN forbade people from playing chess in Yugoslavia?

the match had a multimillion-dollar purse. fischer walked off with several million dollars from the win. that's why it was considered a violation of the "economic" boycott instituted by the US at the time. his opponent, boris spassky, lived in france, and so had no issues.

also, to get there (because the US would not issue him a visa), fischer flew somewhere else (i forget where) and then bought another ticket into the match site. he was warned before he left, both privately and publicly, that the gov't would arrest him if he went there and then came back to the US.

evidently, he's fallen on hard times. the last i heard, he was living in hungary with his girlfriend. i can't imagine what would take him to japan.

mp

Who's going to play Fisher in the movie?

[argent]

This reminds me of the whole cold-war artists-being-deported-to-Russia mentality brought to the screen in the White Nights. Baryshnikov got to play a thinly disguised version of himself in White Nights, but Fisher probably doesn't have the acting skill to pull the same trick off here.

Of course in the movie version they'll have Fisher passing secrets to terrorists in chess moves, and they'll haul him off to Guantanamo for questioning where a quirky hero-worshiping chess-playing chaplain will change Fisher's mind about jews and help him escape to Cuba...

Re:Who's going to play Fisher in the movie?

[rifftide]

Nicholas Cage. "Searching for Bobby Fischer II: Real stories of the Airport Security Patrol" will also feature Sandra Bullock as the American expat stuck in a crummy data entry job for the Japanese government.

Statute of limitations

[tepples]

But isn't there also a "statute of limitations" that limits how long after the alleged crime the state has to take action against an alleged criminal?

Not in the same way, no

[Smeagel]

He's not talking about trick down, he's talking about money growth through investment. If you invest 10 dollars, and there's a minimum hold of $1 for the bank, it can loan 9 back out. That 9 is deposited back in the bank, now they have to hold 90c and can loan 8.10 back out. The eventual effect is that the money grows VERY fast. Many more people have more money to work with, lots more investment and production.

You give it to the government, they spend it -- poorly on something that is HORRIBLE for the economy (like Unionized workers). Then it's done. In our society there seems to be some crazy notion that leaving your money sitting in the bank is going to stagnate our economy, which is only true if no investment is taking place at all. In truth the more money sitting in the bank (theoretically, government regulation can change this) the lower the interest rate is, and the more appealing it is to invest.

...which proves the old saying

[Cryogenes]

Just because you're paranoid it doesn't mean they're not after you.

Fischer is definitely paranoid. For example, he said he believes that all of today's chess matches are rigged (the players have agreed on the sequence of moves beforehand). On a wider scale, he thinks the Jews are after him and his family, that the holocaust did not happen etc.

On the other hand, jailing a person because he played in a chess tournament? Have we all become mad?

[OT] [was: Re:Changed the view of the US?]

[X_Bones]

This is called supply-side economics; it's a nice concept, but it doesn't work. The problem is two-fold: people are greedy, and manufacturing techniques have made human labor more and more obsolete.

Having more money in the bank does not make one more likely to start a business; why risk throwing money down the toilet on a failed startup when you can save it for a rainy day? Likewise, having more money does not make one more likely to consume more. Everyone needs certain manufactured goods, but those can be produced without human labor; that doesn't create any jobs. But the big-ticket items, by their very nature, are only available to a limited market; a small demand would not create many jobs either.* The US tried this in the 80s and it didn't work, and there's no indication that it would work now.


* and don't think that an across-the-board tax cut would help the situation. Big-ticket items would rise in price accordingly, following the classic supply and demand rules.

Re:Statute of Limitations?

[amliebsch]

He broke U.S. law in addition to UN "law," therefore he can be tried in U.S. courts.

Re:What does it take..

[Detritus]

World chess champions have not been noted for their mental stability.

Re:whose freedom did he remove?

[qeveren]

*laugh* Uh... yeah.

So... the United States pays for every other nations' enlightened rehabilitative justice system, sure.

You DO realize that the prison industry in the United States is exactly that: a private industry? It's in their best interests to have as many people as possible in jail at any given time. That's how they get paid, silly.

Re:whose freedom did he remove?

[reidbold]

Number of U.S. executions Value
Year 1999 98
Year 2000 85
Year 2001 66
Year 2002 71
Average per year since 1976 29
Total executions since 1976 820http://www.religioustolerance.org/executd.htm

Fischer vs. Kasparov!

[Apostata]

Screw jail time, let's trot that little paranoid pony to Madison Square Gardens and sit him down with Gary Kasparov (that is, if the the venue could possibly hold their egos).
Quick, somebody start a petition! I'll stand here and criticize from afar!

you sound pretty fucking paranoid

[gelfling]

Mr. Fischer I'm sure could have called any US embassy in the world these past 10 years and asked to get it all straightened out. Instead he knowingly hid and travelled on a revoked passport making the case against him worse.

Would you propose that people you personally like should jump bail just because no puppies or Chomskyites were hurt in the process?

Correct. Further...

[mindstrm]

not all such savants are mathematically inclined... sometimes it's music, sometimes it's memory, sometimes it's bizarre abstract math, etc.

Re:Generalized Hatred

[Colonel Cholling]

First of all, the grandparent post was not expressing the view that American fundamentalist Christians are equally extreme; he was simply saying that that is what Europeans generally think. You have no reason to get upset with him.

Second, I can think of several fundamentalist Christian individuals and groups in answer to your queries, from those who bomb abortion clinics, to Fred Phelps preaching the extermination of all homosexuals. Of course, you can always argue that those individuals and groups don't "really" represent Christian fundamentalism, but then, that's what everyone's been saying about Muslim terrorists as well. Only by a kind of arbitrary ideological gerrymandering can you make it look like your religion is absolutely clean while the other guys account for all the murderers and lunatics.

Re:George W Bush

[east coast]

Fischer referred to George W. Bush during one of his radio interviews as "borderline retarded."

If you knew anything about Fischer you'd realize that he'd probably call you borderline retarded too.

Americans are safer!

[kmankmankman2001]

Proof once again that Mr. Bush is making America safer! Sure, maybe we can't find Osama (guess that might take 12 years?) but we've finally located Bobby Fischer (thanks, Japan!) and all Americans can sleep better, no longer having to fear a mentally ill 61 year-old recluse. I know I feel better.

Fischer's opinion on Judaism

[Von Rex]

Check this out. He wasn't very cordial.

A letter he wrote to a Jewish encylopaedia that said he was a Jew

Re:Chess a crime?

[rguiu]

Thinking may be a crime, western media is ready to accuse Iran of banning chess after the revolution. Chess was allowed again some years ago in Iran, and a Iraning chess players got qualified for the world championship in Las Vegas. He was not allowed to enter the US, the us inmigration office didnt gave him a visa to play the world championship...

Re:Yes, it's 2004,

[frank_adrian314159]

If I were president I'd never trust the CIA again.

And if I were the CIA (given the fact that there appears to have been quite a bit of pressure on them to get the desired information rather than accurate information, I don't think I'd trust the president again...

Now if only they would find Osama...

[Coppit]

Gee, what a big win for the US. Found an aging chess player who was on the run for an act of civil disobedience.

If he were Martha Stewart, he would have gotten a slap on the wrist (and would have still appealed). As it is, I bet he was on some FBI shit list.

By the way, this same sort of thing happened recently with the IEEE and other professional organizations with respect to embargoed axis of evil (TM) countries. They reasoned that if you edit a paper submitted from Iran, you are providing a service to that country. A couple professional societies gave the Treasury Department the finger. In April they finally recently fixed that part of the law so that the organizations are in the clear again.

Government shouldn't block chess or science... Or crypto while I'm at it. :)

That's nothing. . .

[Fantastic Lad]

Yep. Everything is normal and sane with the world.

It's just that Chess Players Liberation Front might be plotting to take out the Statue of Liberty.

It could happen. . .

She looks sort of like a big chess piece, right. . ?

-FL

"You have been lied to since birth. The thing they are terrified you might learn is that it is possible for everybody to be happy and well provided for without misery, fear or ignorance."

Fischerandom Chess

[lseltzer]

Incidentally, in the wake of this story I noticed that he's been promoting something called "Fischerandom Chess" in which the first row pieces are places semi-randomly. See for more on this game.

Re:Fischerandom Chess

[Black Perl]

Incidentally, in the wake of this story I noticed that he's been promoting something called "Fischerandom Chess" in which the first row pieces are places semi-randomly

Yes, I play this way. I put all my pawns on their row in random order.

Sad, but true

[Buran]

So if you need to go there to spend time with your dying father/grandfather BECAUSE HE'S DYING, they expect you to not eat anything while there, not stay anywhere, not get from the airport to where he's hospitalized, etc. etc. And the airlines are asshats and suddenly lose any recognition of the words "bereavement fare" and "family emergency" and "I cannot wait, I have to GO NOW" simply because of where you are trying to go (which is sadly typical of their behavior, I think, and a lot of why they're having money/image problems lately) just because of where your family happens to live.

That seems to me rather cold-hearted and discriminatory on the part of the airlines/government and unfairly passes judgment on those who just happen to be from a particular part of the world and immigrated here for whatever their reasons might have been. Those people haven't done anything wrong and yet they're being fined and thrown in jail for trying to do the same thing anyone else would do... like visit their family, send money back home from wages earned fairly, not necessarily their immediate family (yes, really, there's a law telling you who you have to send money to and how much) ...

Discrimination doesn't have to be about skin color to be discrimination -- it can be ethnic, too. I can't believe these crazy laws are still on the books after literally half a century. Why hasn't Congress repealed this? I'm sure the families of immigrants (and immigrants themselves) can be heard if they want to, and I can't see why they wouldn't want to.

Re:Sad, but true

[SEE]

In the sole case where it's actually been enforced for "literally half a century" - Cuba - "the families of immigrants (and imigrants themselves)" are being heard, and the loudest voices among them don't want to repeal the sanctions.

The Cuba sanctions are supported by the most powerful Cuban-American political groups, and by Cuban-American congressmen - like the two Diaz-Balarts (who are Fidel Castro's nephews). That's why Congress hasn't repealed this.

You can call it ethnic discrimination if you like, but it's the ethnicity itself that supports the discrimination.

Funny how hypocryt people are

[SmallFurryCreature]

All the people against the iraq war was saying america wasn't giving the UN and its sanctions a chance. Now the UN is going after a sanction buster and the same people are crying foul.

Sanction like this have been used before against south-africa. Put the country into total isolation and hope that this will become to big a burden to bear.

Does it work? Well it doesn't for cuba and north-korea (wether it is right or not is another discussion) but it worked in South-Africa.

But if a sanction is going to work it got to be complete. It is sorta like any law. You can have a speeding law but let person X speed because going after just one guy isn't "nice".

There was an embargo, he broke it, he goes to jail. That is was "merely" a chess game is exactly the point. This was a cultural embargo. The entire point of it is to make it very clear to the people inside the embargo that they are no longer welcome in the world unless they learn to behave.

There are just three choices to deal with countries that are "misbehaving", ignore/santion/war. All of them been tried and all failed and succeeded. If you can come up with a better one be sure to tell the world. But at least be consistent. You don't want embargo/santions and don't want war. Then don't whine ever again about something nasty happening to population X by population Y.

Doesn't help this guys case that he is a nutter. There won't be much of a public outcry cause as soon as he opens his mouth people will be on the opposite side. Oh well couldn't have happened to a nicer person.

Re:Arabs are semites.

[Anonymous Coward]

Having spent many years studying natural science and taxonomy, I can assure you that semites are a racial group, like caucasians or negros.

Not all followers of the Jewish faith are semites, but all Arabs are semites. Not all followers of Islam are Arabs.

I have spoken english all my life, and I have discussed matters of race with taxonomists from many countries, and I can confidently state that "anti-semitic" means "opposed to semites".

Judaism is a religion that is often followed by semitic people. Others are Islam, christianity, and Drusism, for example. In proper English, to be opposed to Judaism is to be "anti-Jewish" and to be opposed to Israel is to be "anti-zionist".

I thought computer people were supposed to value logic and precision? Using "anti-semitism" when you mean "anti-zionism" or "anti-judaism" is politician's NewSpeak.

Re:Statute of limitations

[sirwired]

I believe he had been indicted years ago. It just took him a while to be caught.

SirWired

Finally, we are safer...

[DynaSoar]

...now that Osama bin Fischer has been caught.

The government is opportunistic

[JimmytheGeek]

The Feds put a bunch of crap they'd wanted for years into the Patriot Act, because those pesky civil liberties that take the fun out of being a cop. 9/11 was like one of those contest promos where you get to fill a shopping cart in a certain time limit, or the cages with money blowing around - grab while you can!

Now that the War on Terror is here, it is trotted out any time the admin's polls sag. Press conferences without a scintilla of evidence that the threat environment has changed. And a trial balloon over delaying elections...whew!

Hell - even tax cuts were hyped as part of the war on terror.

The fact is, spooks are by nature consiprators. And they are not drawn to the field by their love of untrammeled civil liberties.

"There ought to be limits to freedom." - G.W. Bush
(actual quote related to a parody website - my sig is just a paraphrase)

Define "invest"

[fluxrad]

Youre understanding of the market seems a bit skewed to me.

Assuming Bill goes out and buys 50,000 shares of, say XMSR then in all actuality, the folks at XM Radio won't see a penny of that. We buy stocks from other people, not from the companies themselves, excepting an IPO, in which case, the price remains rather low to begin with. But this is just an infusion of cash, not a continuous stream.

Now, you could be talking about corporate bonds, in which case you'd be right. But AFAIK, most investors aren't looking for high-risk bonds like those of small cap businesses. They're looking for large-cap investments to shore up whatever it is they're doing in the market. This will create a few new jobs, but nothing on the scale of what you're talking about.

In reality, if you want to grow the economy, the best practice is to infuse money directly into the hands of consumers. Most people (unlike companies and the majority of the wealthy) don't stick their cash in a drawer somewhere; they spend it. And when they buy more goods, corporations' earnings go up. When corporate earnings go up, they hire more people, etc.

But this all goes back into the argument against supply side economics. The money at the top of the economic foodchain has a wicked tendency to stay at the top.

Selective "recognition" of UN rulings legitmacy

[scupper]

It's interesting how the US, and many of it's citizens, selectively "recognize" UN authority and legitmacy, as in this case with the "UN Sanctions against Yugoslavia" and Bobby Fisher's case. When it's convenient politically to the US government, the UN is a righteous body of nations whose sanctions are tantimount US law. When it's not convenient, and the UN members don't please US leaders, it's inferred they are incompetent, scammming third world tour guides trying to screw the American People.

Re:Selective "recognition" of UN rulings legitmacy

[jlanthripp]

Actually, I'm a US citizen, and I've never thought of the UN as anything other than scammers bent on screwing the American People.

They're not exactly incompetent though, as they've managed to get the US to foot the bill for pretty much everything of consequence they've ever done. And the US, despite providing quite a bit of the most expensive real estate on planet Earth for the UN's office space, despite providing virtually all the manpower ever used to enforce UN policies, despite paying in blood for the UN's fuckups, still owes UN dues!

The only reason I don't want to see the US withdraw from the UN (and cease all foreign aid to banana republic dictators, etc. etc.) is because at this point in the game it would just make matters even worse.

A response to everyone...

[Anita Coney]

Everyone who responded negatively to my posting argued exactly the same thing: What Bobby Fischer did was against the law, he knew it was against the law, so he should be punished for violating the law.

While that is technically true, none of you stopped to consider that maybe, just maybe, the law was wrong.

For example, imagine if there was a law that stated that anyone wearing plaid would be shot on sight. The next day thousands are shot dead for wearing plaid. It was the law, they knew it was the law, and they were punished. Would any of you agree that justice was served?! I sure in hell hope not!

Re:Arabs are semites.

[XunilOS]

Except Science has already come out and concluded that there are no genetic distictions for race.

I find this hard to believe. I'm not a racist mind you, I just don't understand how there could *not* be some DNA marker that makes someone have dark brown skin, or almond-shaped eyes, just like there are genetic markers that make you have blonde hair or red hair or freckles or a big nose.

Are you saying then that there isn't a chunk of DNA that equals "asian" or "native american" or whatever? That what we perceive as a "race" is just a collection of physical traits (asians tend to have a specific eye shape, frequently have dark, straight hair, etc.)? If this is your statement, I agree with you, but if you're saying that DNA doesn't dictate what you look like, I'm very confused.

many more mistakes than that

[JimmytheGeek]

They cover a wide area:

math: Claiming X - Y (where both X and Y are > 0) = X in a televised debate. "Fuzzy math! Fuzzy math!" The topic was privatizing social security. Gore said, correctly, that diverting payments that go to current retirees to private accounts leaves a shortfall.

biology: doesn't believe in principle of evolution

statecraft: squandered goodwill after 9/11: went from state much sympathized to pariah state much feared.

statecraft 2: got in a land war in asia. They'll trade 2-10 for every one until we're done. We'll win every battle until we quit.

statecraft 3: didn't finish potentially winnable war in asia because of elective war in iraq.

governance: did not prevent torture from being used on those whose hearts and minds we're trying to win.

governance 2: did not anticipate any problems in Iraq. Every expert did. Went in cheap and sloppy.

character: lacks the humility and curiosity necessary to avoid the above mistakes. Leads to worse. For example, should have known that unsupervised, untrained 18 year olds will abuse authority. Or should have hired folks who knew that. Instead, encouraged abuse.

at a certain point, being an optimist equates to being a dumbass. We're long past that point with W.

Hypocrite US gov't violated the sanctions itself!

[mdecerbo]

It's really hypocritical that the US government can go after Bobby Fischer for violating the UN sanctions on the former Yugoslavia, when that same government was violating them on a massive scale.

And while Bobby was just playing a chess match, the Feds were shipping huge amounts of arms to their favorite players in the region, the separatist Bosnian Muslims. As the Guardian newspaper in England documented :

...the Pentagon had incurred debts to Islamist groups and their Middle Eastern sponsors. By 1993 these groups, many supported by Iran and Saudi Arabia, were anxious to help Bosnian Muslims fighting in the former Yugoslavia and called in their debts with the Americans. Bill Clinton and the Pentagon were keen to be seen as creditworthy and repaid in the form of an Iran-Contra style operation - in flagrant violation of the UN security council arms embargo against all combatants in the former Yugoslavia.

The result was a vast secret conduit of weapons smuggling though Croatia. This was arranged by the clandestine agencies of the US, Turkey and Iran... Initially aircraft from Iran Air were used, but as the volume increased they were joined by a mysterious fleet of black C-130 Hercules aircraft.

Just as the trial of Slobodan Milosevic is exposing the fact that most of the claims used to justify the US's Kosovo war were bogus, maybe poor Fischer's inevitable trial will expose the lies told to justify the Bosnian war.

Now that it's been revealed that al-Qaeda members were fighting for the Bosnian Muslims, maybe the USA will acknowledge their mistaken policy, apologize to poor Bobby, and let him go.

Yeah, right. Being an Empire means never having to say you're sorry.

Re:Arabs are semites.

[Fnkmaster]

Very nice, I'm glad you have studied natural science and taxonomy for many years. You are still wrong, probably because you have not spent even a modicum of time studying linguistics. Language is not a logical puzzle, and words change meaning over time. That is how language evolves. Another poster posted the time-honored example of inflammable and flammable - your very logical, taxonomically organizing brain may tell you inflammable means "not flammable", but it would be wrong. See here or click on a few of the definitions here. Linguistics teaches us that language is a living, changing thing - in English speaking lands, bias against Jews has been around much longer than bias against Arabs or other Semitic peoples due to the historical presence of Jews throughout Europe, and then in America. It's thus hardly shocking that the word "anti-Semitism" has come to mean anti-Jewish bias. This isn't Newspeak at all, if you see the Wikipedia entry, you'd know that in fact the word derives from German racial science usage in the 1800s, and for over a century, referred exclusively to hatred of or bias against Jews. So in fact, the "Newspeak" is the attempt to broaden the word, or rather to muddy the semantics which were previously clear, with another definition.

Anti-Zionism is a strange one - since Zionism, historically, arose as a response to anti-Semitism. This is such a confused, muddied term, I'd stay away from it entirely, since it tries to collapse complicated political issues into a jingoistic phrase. Lots of people, Jews included and Israelis included, don't support parts of current Israeli government policy, ongoing occupation and so on. The word "anti-Zionist" could mean almost anything, and even Wikipedia seems befuddled by this issue since the page on it is currently locked as a result of editorial disputes.

Anti-Judaism is a pretty awkward sounding word, as is "Anti-Islam". I'd stick to "anti-Jewish bias", "anti-Muslim bias" or "anti-Arab bias" if you're worried about being misunderstood. But the hubbub against anti-Semitism needs to stop now - you can't expect people to change the meaning of words to accomodate your political agenda, and if you go around flapping your arms when people use perfectly clear dictionary English words, you're going to end up marginalizing yourself and your viewpoint.

Geography

[dolmen.fr]

"The sanctions were imposed on Yugoslavia for provoking warfare in neighboring Bosnia-Herzegovina."

I hope one day, US journalists will learn geography...
FYI, Bosnia-Herzegovina is a part of former Yugoslavia. Not a neighboor.