Trump

[Paul Bonham]

Re: Trump

I took 'manned' to mean what it *might* have meant to Emerson, i.e.: prepared themselves to act in a moral, courageous way; to act with integrity. Definitely not Trumpian. :)

I agree with your other comments. The tension that is building here is starting to remind me of the Cuban missile crisis. I was only 11 then but that was old enough to understand what was happening. Some might say that the Cuban situation was different because the U.S. was facing an enemy with ICBMs that could reach the U.S. but I don't think the U.S. can be certain of China's support in this situation. The U.S. couldn't win a conventional war in Korea. What does that leave?

The part about Trump that really tells just who we've put in charge is this: he criticized Obama for too much playing golf and for taking too many vacations and other things at taxpayer expense, and then once he himself gets in the White House, he spends almost every weekend playing golf at his resort in Florida at taxpayer expense.

Even if there was nothing else we could criticized Trump for, this alone says enough about his character. There's also the nepotism and the whole sense of the Trumps as some new "Royal Family". He even wants to ride in Queen Elizabeth's royal carriage if he makes a state trip to England!

And then we have all the Russian connection possibilities, his refusal to release his taxes, his past crimes of sexual assault and stiffing contractors....

I think he's ready to press the trigger on North Korea. He's depending on China to avoid that. After labeling China a currency manipulator and campaigning on renegotiating trade deals with China to bring back American jobs, now he's throwing all that to the wind and saying "China's ok" so that they'll put pressure on North Korea. So even if North Korea caves and starts bilateral talks, Trump has abandoned his policy of being tough with China. All those factory workers in Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Ohio who switched allegiance on that policy alone are left in the lurch. China is off the hook. And like you say, Peter, China cannot be depended on. Trump has a stroll with their leader on the White House lawn, and after 10 minutes he says to the press: "Wow, I didn't know North Korea was so complicated." But more telling, he also says "I like Xi Jinping (President of China), he seems like he genuinely wants to help." Trump is a pushover, besides being a buffoon. On the basis of that 10 minute stroll, millions of rust belt Trump supporters got thrown under the bus.

Trump talks about it as a business deal. "Why would I call them a currency manipulator if they are helping us on North Korea?" he asks. Well, the answer should be "because they are a currency manipulator" if that's what they really are, which Trump was saying for months on end, along with "On Day 1, we repeal and replace Obamacare."

He has no scruples. But that's what we get with a businessman, because in business there are no scruples. There is no security, no stability, everything is subject to change at any time. Treaties and trade deals mean nothing. "NATO is obsolete!" (a few months later) "NATO is no longer obsolete."

Vlad Drkulec and his mindless think-alikes may foam at the mouth about Hillary Clinton, but if the missiles fly in Asia, the resulting effect on the entire world will make Hillary a long-lost vision of progress and stability, gone forever.

[Bob Armstrong]

Re: Trump

That is quite an interesting quote. The "boasters and buffoons" sounds a lot like Trump, but in the face of everything that is happening on the North Korea front, the "manned themselves to face it" part also sounds like what Trump is doing. At some point, North Korea has to be confronted.

But then I read this: Trump on North Korea: 'I just don't telegraph my moves'

And I realized, Trump is SO narcissistic that he would dare to put millions of lives on the line in order to claim his place in history. Perhaps ditto for Kin Jong-un.

In this North Korea - USA clash, we literally have the confrontation of all the worst aspects of humanity!

We haven't had this in decades. Very unlikely that either side is going to blink. One of them is going to "win", and no matter how long it takes, the win will not be pretty for humanity. Irrespective of lives lost, there will be generational damages to the entire world economy, to all the progress of civilization. Perhaps Mutual Assured Destruction as a policy leads only to..... mutual assured destruction.

China and Russia are getting more and more involved. This is rapidly becoming the biggest story of our lifetimes, bigger by far than 9/11 or ISIS.

HI Paul:

I agree with your analysis.

My only thought is that what is needed is a new third force (Perhaps armed) of "conscientious objector peace-makers (Not peace-keepers)".

The strategy:

1. separate the combatants bit by bit, hopefully by persuasion, not force (Only a last resort);

2. educate on the zero sum game that the Heads Team and the Tails Team are getting into, to both combatants and the public - a delivery of a "Message" - the pacifist strategy;

3. no violence except if the combatants refuse to retreat from the war zone; violence only proportionate to the need to establish a full truce; both sides equally targets of the peace-makers - the "reluctant force" strategy.

THE GOALS:

1. The status quo..........the centre will hold!

2. Negotiations to improve the status quo for the Heads Team, the Tails Team and the global public.

Bob A.

[Peter McKillop]

Re: Trump

According to CBC, Fox News gave Bill O'Reilly the boot!! Maybe there is a bit of decency in the world after all.

Don't worry, Bill. Now you can get a job with a really first class news organization like...um...Breitbart?!?

[Peter McKillop]

Re: Trump

According to CBC, Fox News gave Bill O'Reilly the boot!! Maybe there is a bit of decency in the world after all.

Don't worry, Bill. Now you can get a job with a really first class news organization like...um...Breitbart?!?

Clarification: when I say decency I'm not referring to Fox News, the scumbag news org which reportedly paid out $13million to cover up O'Reilly's trail of sexual harrassment. I'm referring to the dozens of corporations who pulled/threatened to pull their advertising revenue, thereby forcing Fox to do the right thing. Of course, being forced to do the right thing is a good way to show the public that you're just dripping with integrity.

P.S. Hey Bill! I'll bet your grandkids are just soooo proud of you! :)

[Neil Frarey]

Re: Trump

Clarification: when I say decency I'm not referring to Fox News, the scumbag news org which reportedly paid out $13million to cover up O'Reilly's trail of sexual harrassment. I'm referring to the dozens of corporations who pulled/threatened to pull their advertising revenue, thereby forcing Fox to do the right thing. Of course, being forced to do the right thing is a good way to show the public that you're just dripping with integrity.

P.S. Hey Bill! I'll bet your grandkids are just soooo proud of you! :)

Not unlike the Chess Federation of Canada ... being FORCED to do the 'right thing'. All those decades of abuse ... huh Peter?

And weren't your kind here all along the way - with your sage like advice / opinions???

[Peter McKillop]

Re: Trump

Not unlike the Chess Federation of Canada ... being FORCED to do the 'right thing'. All those decades of abuse ... huh Peter?

And weren't your kind here all along the way - with your sage like advice / opinions???

What abuse are you talking about? And who are my kind?

[Neil Frarey]

Re: Trump

What abuse are you talking about? And who are my kind?

I won't go into the mess the CFC created exploiting their dubious Charitable status ... and all those tax receipts issued. How much cash did you guys hustle? Here's a refresher:

http://forum.chesstalk.com/archive/i...hp/t-4580.html

How many CFC presidents & and their sidekick execs let that matter fester? Or did they even care? Go along to get along, huh?

But what I will go into is the corruption I personally put an end to. The Chess Federation of Canada's abusive conduct even went as far as exploiting their office space here in Ottawa ... zoned as light industrial they leased part of the upstairs as a residential apartment (was that money kept off the books? Put straight into petty cash, perhaps?) to several of their own employees! Until I called By-Law.

Time to drain the swamp, Peter.

[Bob Armstrong]

Re: CFC Loss of Charitable Status - The Facts

I won't go into the mess the CFC created exploiting their dubious Charitable status ... and all those tax receipts issued. How much cash did you guys hustle? Here's a refresher:

http://forum.chesstalk.com/archive/i...hp/t-4580.html

How many CFC presidents & and their sidekick execs let that matter fester? Or did they even care? Go along to get along, huh?

But what I will go into is the corruption I personally put an end to. The Chess Federation of Canada's abusive conduct even went as far as exploiting their office space here in Ottawa ... zoned as light industrial they leased part of the upstairs as a residential apartment (was that money kept off the books? Put straight into petty cash, perhaps?) to several of their own employees! Until I called By-Law.

Time to drain the swamp, Peter.

Hi Neil:

I was CFC Public Relations Coordinator at the time of the struggle with CRA to keep our CFC charitable status which had been received an eternity ago, as was the case with lots of other charitable organizations. I no longer have any role in CFC so this is just an "Unofficial", though I believe "informed" presentation of fact.

CFC always believed it had a right to its charitable status. And CRA did as well!

When a problem arose with CRA, CFC had a pro bono lawyer deal with it and over about 5-10 years, kept making presentations why CFC should keep its status.

You mention "all those tax receipts issued" - they were issued in good faith, and accepted at the time by CRA. And when a problem arose, it had nothing to do with any particular tax receipts CFC had issued.

The core issue was much more difficult to meet, and historical........not at all dealing with any action at all by the CFC re exercising its charitable status.

The Harper government had done a review of all organizations with charitable status, from the date of their getting charitable status. The goal was to eliminate as many licenses to give deductible tax receipts as possible - the reasons for this are given, many and arguable.

In any event, CFC was picked at random as one of this review group.

CRA decided that CFC should never have gotten Charitable Status FROM THE VERY BEGINNING!! (Had nothing to do with CFC's perfectly legitimate subsequent handling of their charitable status - will everyone please grapple that statement to their hearts with hoops of steel..............CRA NEVER charged CFC with wrongly handling its charitable status..........it was a purely theoretical thing about the old Common Law of England in the 1600's and what is called the four heads of poverty. The ISSUE: Was CFC SOLELY dedicated to that head on which it had originally received its status.......junior education.

CFC clearly admitted it implemented other activities beyond youth chess education, tournaments, etc. But argued their work in this area was substantial.

CRA, to my knowleDge agreed it was "substantial". But it's decision was that it had to be "total" to have gotten the license in the very first place, at the very start.

So effectively, CFC's charitable status was "Rescinded" - it was as if CFC never ever got the license in the first place.

CRA admitted that it was THEIR ERROR, though well-intentioned, that CFC got charitable status. CRA's position was that if they had done their job correctly AT THE START, CFC's application would have been dismissed.

Nevertheless, even though it was a CRA error, this did not allow CFC to continue to keep the license........CFC should never have gotten it, and so they could NOT KEEP it.

So it was rescinded and CFC was for the first time, without charitable status. This did hurt as there was a drop in donations, given no tax deduction receipts for the donors.

I would very much appreciate Vlad Drkulec, CFC President, confirming my post, and making any necessary corrections.

There are those who are besmirching the CFC image around the charitable status issue (Whether deliberately or unknowing of the true facts), and this MUST stop!

I would even go so far as to suggest that there should be an article on the CFC website similar to the above Post, to publicly put this to bed; critics can be referred to the website article for the "True Facts", not the "False Rumours".

Bob Armstrong (5-yr volunteer Voting Member - then called a "Governor"; for 3 of those years, volunteer CFC Public Relations Coordinator; CFC Life Member, and still active, though now over 70 y.o.! :) ; also retired lawyer - though did not do tax, but did incorporate non-profit corporations, and through this dealt with charitable status a little bit.)

[Vlad Drkulec]

Re: CFC Loss of Charitable Status - The Facts

I would very much appreciate Vlad Drkulec, CFC President, confirming my post, and making any necessary corrections.

There are those who are besmirching the CFC image around the charitable status issue (Whether deliberately or unknowing of the true facts), and this MUST stop!

I would even go so far as to suggest that there should be an article on the CFC website similar to the above Post, to publicly put this to bed; critics can be referred to the website article for the "True Facts", not the "False Rumours".

Bob Armstrong (5-yr volunteer Voting Member - then called a "Governor"; for 3 of those years, volunteer CFC Public Relations Coordinator; CFC Life Member, and still active, though now over 70 y.o.! :) ; also retired lawyer - though did not do tax, but did incorporate non-profit corporations, and through this dealt with charitable status a little bit.)

Your account is largely what I understand the situation to be from discussions from members of the executive who were around when the events in question transpired. In addition, I think that donations were minimal over the years and it was decided that the net present value of future donations was less than the cost of pursuing maintenance of the status quo.

I'm not sure all this has anything to do with Trump though.

[Vlad Drkulec]

Re: Trump

I won't go into the mess the CFC created exploiting their dubious Charitable status ... and all those tax receipts issued. How much cash did you guys hustle? Here's a refresher:

http://forum.chesstalk.com/archive/i...hp/t-4580.html

How many CFC presidents & and their sidekick execs let that matter fester? Or did they even care? Go along to get along, huh?

But what I will go into is the corruption I personally put an end to. The Chess Federation of Canada's abusive conduct even went as far as exploiting their office space here in Ottawa ... zoned as light industrial they leased part of the upstairs as a residential apartment (was that money kept off the books? Put straight into petty cash, perhaps?) to several of their own employees! Until I called By-Law.

Time to drain the swamp, Peter.

It should be noted that later governments legalized these types of non-conventional residential units and encouraged their proliferation. The way I heard it is that you went into a snit because you were going to the CFC office and making a nuisance of yourself and making it difficult for employees to do their jobs because you wanted to hang out and socialize. You were asked to stop doing so. The reports were that you were a nice guy but lonely. You got your revenge by ratting out the employee who was living on the premises. That story says a lot about you and little about the CFC as I doubt that the income from the unit was not properly accounted for in the financial statements of the day. Given that the unit was sold about a decade ago it is not terribly relevant to the situation today.

[Bob Armstrong]

Re: CFC Loss of Charitable Status - The Facts

Your account is largely what I understand the situation to be from discussions from members of the executive who were around when the events in question transpired. In addition, I think that donations were minimal over the years and it was decided that the net present value of future donations was less than the cost of pursuing maintenance of the status quo.

I'm not sure all this has anything to do with Trump though.

CFC losing "Charitable Status" was BAD.

Trump is BAD.

ERGO: Trump should get LOST!

Ironclad logic, Vlad........ties in very neatly! :)

Bob A

[Paul Bonham]

Re: Trump

....You got your revenge by ratting out the employee who was living on the premises.....

Ahhh, so that's why the little bugger went into hiding for many years, going by a different name.

[Bob Gillanders]

Re: Trump

I won't go into the mess the CFC created.....

It has been 10 years now since I first got involved in CFC politics. It has been a voyage of discovery of the many factions, disputes, grudges, warts, that have created divisions among the Canadian chess community. Many of these disputes go back decades. I was thinking recently that we had moved beyond it. Silly me.

Why can't we all just get along?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MPMmC0UAnj0

[Erik Malmsten]

Re: CFC Loss of Charitable Status - The Facts

Your account is largely what I understand the situation to be from discussions from members of the executive who were around when the events in question transpired. In addition, I think that donations were minimal over the years and it was decided that the net present value of future donations was less than the cost of pursuing maintenance of the status quo.

I'm not sure all this has anything to do with Trump though.

While the CFC's international program gets no sports funding, the CFC dropped the ball as a children's chess charity could be set up as the Chess Institue of Canada has done in Toronto:
http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/ebci/haip/s...3Bb%3Dtrue&m=1

[Bob Armstrong]

Re: CFC Loss of Charitable Status - The Separate Junior Program Option

While the CFC's international program gets no sports funding, the CFC dropped the ball as a children's chess charity could be set up as the Chess Institue of Canada has done in Toronto:
http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/ebci/haip/s...3Bb%3Dtrue&m=1

Hi Erik:

It is my recollection (But my memory is medically defective), that when CFC had its Charitable Status rescinded, we did discuss the setting up of an arm's length separate CFC Junior Organization with Les Bunning, our pro bono lawyer who had fought the tax case for us for so long.

There were a number of reasons for rejecting the idea:

1. a separate bureaucracy, when CFC could hardly manage its own (And CFC already had the Chess Foundation of Canada as a separate CFC unit).
2. the issue was addressed as to who would benefit from the tax receipts from this new Junior Program..........it was felt that the families who would benefit were generally well-off; poorer families had trouble affording expensive world junior tournaments. It would be nice to benefit the families of these juniors, but at what cost?
3. CFC wished to pursue the "Sport" route of issuing tax receipts.

So the decision was made to shelve the Independent CFC Junior Program possibility, for future discussion (And then, like many CFC good intentions, it fell off the radar).

Again, I'd like an exec (current or past) to confirm my recollection.

Thanks.

Bob