If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Policy / Politique
The fee for tournament organizers advertising on ChessTalk is $20/event or $100/yearly unlimited for the year.
Les frais d'inscription des organisateurs de tournoi sur ChessTalk sont de 20 $/événement ou de 100 $/année illimitée.
You can etransfer to Henry Lam at chesstalkforum at gmail dot com
Transfér à Henry Lam à chesstalkforum@gmail.com
Dark Knight / Le Chevalier Noir
General Guidelines
---- Nous avons besoin d'un traduction français!
Some Basics
1. Under Board "Frequently Asked Questions" (FAQs) there are 3 sections dealing with General Forum Usage, User Profile Features, and Reading and Posting Messages. These deal with everything from Avatars to Your Notifications. Most general technical questions are covered there. Here is a link to the FAQs. https://forum.chesstalk.com/help
2. Consider using the SEARCH button if you are looking for information. You may find your question has already been answered in a previous thread.
3. If you've looked for an answer to a question, and not found one, then you should consider asking your question in a new thread. For example, there have already been questions and discussion regarding: how to do chess diagrams (FENs); crosstables that line up properly; and the numerous little “glitches” that every new site will have.
4. Read pinned or sticky threads, like this one, if they look important. This applies especially to newcomers.
5. Read the thread you're posting in before you post. There are a variety of ways to look at a thread. These are covered under “Display Modes”.
6. Thread titles: please provide some details in your thread title. This is useful for a number of reasons. It helps ChessTalk members to quickly skim the threads. It prevents duplication of threads. And so on.
7. Unnecessary thread proliferation (e.g., deliberately creating a new thread that duplicates existing discussion) is discouraged. Look to see if a thread on your topic may have already been started and, if so, consider adding your contribution to the pre-existing thread. However, starting new threads to explore side-issues that are not relevant to the original subject is strongly encouraged. A single thread on the Canadian Open, with hundreds of posts on multiple sub-topics, is no better than a dozen threads on the Open covering only a few topics. Use your good judgment when starting a new thread.
8. If and/or when sub-forums are created, please make sure to create threads in the proper place.
Debate
9. Give an opinion and back it up with a reason. Throwaway comments such as "Game X pwnz because my friend and I think so!" could be considered pointless at best, and inflammatory at worst.
10. Try to give your own opinions, not simply those copied and pasted from reviews or opinions of your friends.
Unacceptable behavior and warnings
11. In registering here at ChessTalk please note that the same or similar rules apply here as applied at the previous Boardhost message board. In particular, the following content is not permitted to appear in any messages:
* Racism
* Hatred
* Harassment
* Adult content
* Obscene material
* Nudity or pornography
* Material that infringes intellectual property or other proprietary rights of any party
* Material the posting of which is tortious or violates a contractual or fiduciary obligation you or we owe to another party
* Piracy, hacking, viruses, worms, or warez
* Spam
* Any illegal content
* unapproved Commercial banner advertisements or revenue-generating links
* Any link to or any images from a site containing any material outlined in these restrictions
* Any material deemed offensive or inappropriate by the Board staff
12. Users are welcome to challenge other points of view and opinions, but should do so respectfully. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. Posts and threads with unacceptable content can be closed or deleted altogether. Furthermore, a range of sanctions are possible - from a simple warning to a temporary or even a permanent banning from ChessTalk.
Helping to Moderate
13. 'Report' links (an exclamation mark inside a triangle) can be found in many places throughout the board. These links allow users to alert the board staff to anything which is offensive, objectionable or illegal. Please consider using this feature if the need arises.
Advice for free
14. You should exercise the same caution with Private Messages as you would with any public posting.
The Republicans have been on a witch hunt for decades against the Clinton's.
Investigation after investigation after investigation, have come up short.
Things like due process and evidence keeps getting in the way.
So now, instead of waiting for the jury to decide, they grab their pitchforks and torches.
Is Hillary a witch? I don't know, but I think most of the claims are born of hysteria.
The Republicans have been on a witch hunt for decades against the Clinton's.
Investigation after investigation after investigation, have come up short.
Things like due process and evidence keeps getting in the way.
So now, instead of waiting for the jury to decide, they grab their pitchforks and torches.
Is Hillary a witch? I don't know, but I think most of the claims are born of hysteria.
From GOOGLE.ca
WITCH HUNT:
informal
a campaign directed against a person or group holding unorthodox or unpopular views.
R U trolling?
How dare the Republicans go after the CLINTON FAMILY, that bastion of honesty, truth-telling and high-level morality?
I think Tom's statement is backed up by historical fact. Namely one of the actions taken during World War 2 was the incarceration of tens of thousands of Japanese cities and the confiscation of their assets for no other reason then their ethnic heritage. When a government unjustly turns against it's own citizens on the basis of generalizations this constitutes a fascist like mentality.
Good point, but implicit in your post are some interesting questions. What quantity/severity of incidents is/are required to classify a person as one thing or another? What Roosevelt did to Japanese-Americans and Japanese residents can't be defended but does it earn him the tag of fascist for all time? Was Roosevelt a fascist who took advantage of the hysteria of the times to inflict a racist action on a vulnerable community? Or was Roosevelt a left-of-centre politician who, because of a weakness in his character (including racism, perhaps), succumbed to the hysteria of the times and allowed himself to be instrumental in inflicting horrible damage on a vulnerable community?
"We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office." - Aesop
"Only the dead have seen the end of war." - Plato
"If once a man indulges himself in murder, very soon he comes to think little of robbing; and from robbing he comes next to drinking and Sabbath-breaking, and from that to incivility and procrastination." - Thomas De Quincey
Good point, but implicit in your post are some interesting questions. What quantity/severity of incidents is/are required to classify a person as one thing or another? What Roosevelt did to Japanese-Americans and Japanese residents can't be defended but does it earn him the tag of fascist for all time? Was Roosevelt a fascist who took advantage of the hysteria of the times to inflict a racist action on a vulnerable community? Or was Roosevelt a left-of-centre politician who, because of a weakness in his character (including racism, perhaps), succumbed to the hysteria of the times and allowed himself to be instrumental in inflicting horrible damage on a vulnerable community?
From where I sit that is one glaring example. Roosevelt denied Jewish Refugees entry into the United States in the 1930's when the Germans persecution policies were very clear even before World War 2. This culminated in the infamous "Voyage of the Damned" St Louis ship Jewish Refugees being denied entry into the USA and sent back to Europe where concentration camps awaited them.
On July 28 1943 Jan Karski met with FDR to warn him of the eminent annihilation of European Jewry and Roosevelt changed the conversation and talked about the shortage of horses in Poland from German confiscation of these animals for their war effort and how this would affect an agrarian society like Poland. He reassured Karski in general terms that allied victory would happen.
In 1944 a proposal was presented to Roosevelt to bomb the rail tracks leading to Auschwitz and slow down the gassing of 500,000 Hungarian Jews that were being slaughtered daily. Ex Presidential Candidate George Mcgovern was on industrial bombing missions near Auschwitz at the time and said that bombing the tracks would not have been a problem at all. This proposal was rejected.
In fact the US did not even enter the war until Dec 7th 1941 after the Pearl Harbor attack.
So yes I still see some justification in labeling Roosevelt as a Fascist.
Your kind Paul Bonham, the socialistic kind of thug along with your snout-in-the-trough masses, the pay-for-play Clinton extending Obama's what-is-yours-is-mine kind ... thank your lucky stars you were born in America built by strong business leadership for you to even try to manipulate!
Tax and tax and tax even higher!
And it's so very sad to see how Democrats have corrupted everything that was great about America's government. Poisoned the Department of Justice, poisoned the Department of State, and even tried in vain to corrupt the FBI.
Let it go!!! STOP ... please stop.
America was built by strong business leadership ... period!
YOUR kind, Neil Frarey, the dictatorial kind of thug with your Trump Tower elites, the deportation force Trump extending David Duke's white superiority kind.... curse your family tree for not being born in the America that was BUILT BY OPEN BORDERS AND IMMIGRATION... PERIOD!
Strong business leadership gets you nowhere if you don't have willing, healthy and able workers!
It's so sad to see how the Repugs demean the backbone of America, the hard-working blue collar immigrants and non-immigrants alike who do the jobs that the Trumps would never stoop to do, and then get shafted by Trump in bankruptcy court to keep Trump's personal net worth in the stratosphere....
Neil, what you call the "what is yours is mine" mentality is in fact the mentality of the Republicans who would if they had total control tax the middle class to poverty level..... you are pissed because the Democrats want to end the elitism of which you are so enamoured and turn the taxing power of the government against the elites to bring an end to the increasing greed-driven wealth polarization that will only lead to total economic collapse. With the Democrats, it is a "what is yours is ours" mentality, a very important distinction from that of the Republicans.
Luckily some of the elites themselves are in favor of the Democrats and their tax-the-rich policies to save America. Warren Buffett in particular, Mark Cuban and many others. It's interesting about Cuban, because he's a big fan of the entrepeneurial spirit. But even he recognizes that the pursuit of personal gain has its limits, which government must enforce because greed is an addiction just like any other.
I think what you need to learn, Neil, is this simple truth: all good things IN MODERATION.
Greed can be good, it can impulse the creation of great businesses, but left unchecked, it can turn into a destructive force. The Democrats are not against strong business leadership as long as it respects the rights and livelihood of the worker class. Nobody is talking about creating a totally egalitarian society, which we can agree would be both impossible and wrong-headed.
But the truth that the Democrats see, that the Republicans blind themselves to, is this: strong business leadership aka greed is only good up to a point. Beyond that point, when a business is trying to achieve total market monopoly or a business leader is trying to avoid paying back to society a reasonable taxation to pay for things like food stamps, the military, education, infrastructure.... that level of greed becomes a threat to the system as a whole.
It was FDR's New Deal that eventually brought an end to the Great Depression that followed the Roaring Twenties, when all kinds of greed was going unchecked. And then we had to learn the lesson all over again just a few short years ago, when unchecked "strong business leadership" brought about the downfall of several corporate giants and again forced government intervention to save us from the greed of a few.
Sorry, Neil, you can't get away with falsifying the facts. Your unchecked strong business leadership inevitably leads to economic collapse.... PERIOD!
Repeat after me, Neil, and be cleansed of your toxic vitriol.... all good things in moderation.... all good things in moderation.....
Only the rushing is heard...
Onward flies the bird.
.... In 1944 a proposal was presented to Roosevelt to bomb the rail tracks leading to Auschwitz and slow down the gassing of 500,000 Hungarian Jews that were being slaughtered daily. Ex Presidential Candidate George Mcgovern was on industrial bombing missions near Auschwitz at the time and said that bombing the tracks would not have been a problem at all. This proposal was rejected.
In fact the US did not even enter the war until Dec 7th 1941 after the Pearl Harbor attack.
So yes I still see some justification in labeling Roosevelt as a Fascist.
Are you implying..... that if the Japanese had never attacked the U.S., had never entered WWII at all..... that FDR would have kept the U.S. out of the European conflict entirely because of fascist sympathizing with Hitler?
That is an explosive allegation. I hope you have some evidence, some literature, to back it up.
Only the rushing is heard...
Onward flies the bird.
Reference where i said that??? I cited historical facts. The book that best covers the 1944 history of Auschwitz and the allies is the book Auschwitz and the Allies by Martin Gilbert. As to whether or not the US would have entered the war if not for Pearl Harbor. is pure speculation that I did not and can not comment on. Roosevelt did have the support of many isolationists prior to entering the war albeit on the economic side to Roosevelt's credit he repealed the restrictive Smoot Hawley tariff act of 1930 in 1934 that opened the doors to better trade numbers internationally.
Reference where i said that??? I cited historical facts. The book that best covers the 1944 history of Auschwitz and the allies is the book Auschwitz and the Allies by Martin Gilbert. As to whether or not the US would have entered the war if not for Pearl Harbor. is pure speculation that I did not and can not comment on. Roosevelt did have the support of many isolationists prior to entering the war albeit on the economic side to Roosevelt's credit he repealed the restrictive Smoot Hawley tariff act of 1930 in 1934 that opened the doors to better trade numbers internationally.
You didn't just cite historical facts, you CHERRY-PICKED specific and almost trivial historical facts all leading to the conclusion that I put into words. And when presented with what your were really saying, you go "Where did I say that?"
Hey, if you want to suggest a controversial theory then just come out and say it, and use your facts if that's what they are to defend it. Don't be a wuss and imply it, and then act shocked when it gets put into proper words by someone else.
And by the way, you wrote that the U.S. didn't "even" enter the war until Japan bombed Pearl Harbor.... the inclusion of the word "even" leads to an implication that were it not for Pearl Harbor, the U.S. would have continued to stay out of the war. So yes, you DID express an opinion on that. You can fool some of the people some of the time.........
Only the rushing is heard...
Onward flies the bird.
R U trolling?
Thanks for my belly laugh of the day!!
Not trolling, just trying to add some humour.
Try this one:
President Trump has made the American economy "great again", just like medieval England, and now the King travels to the far away breakaway region of Vermont where Bernie Sanders tries to explains democratic socialism.
From where I sit that is one glaring example. Roosevelt denied Jewish Refugees entry into the United States in the 1930's when the Germans persecution policies were very clear even before World War 2. This culminated in the infamous "Voyage of the Damned" St Louis ship Jewish Refugees being denied entry into the USA and sent back to Europe where concentration camps awaited them.
On July 28 1943 Jan Karski met with FDR to warn him of the eminent annihilation of European Jewry and Roosevelt changed the conversation and talked about the shortage of horses in Poland from German confiscation of these animals for their war effort and how this would affect an agrarian society like Poland. He reassured Karski in general terms that allied victory would happen.
In 1944 a proposal was presented to Roosevelt to bomb the rail tracks leading to Auschwitz and slow down the gassing of 500,000 Hungarian Jews that were being slaughtered daily. Ex Presidential Candidate George Mcgovern was on industrial bombing missions near Auschwitz at the time and said that bombing the tracks would not have been a problem at all. This proposal was rejected.
In fact the US did not even enter the war until Dec 7th 1941 after the Pearl Harbor attack.
So yes I still see some justification in labeling Roosevelt as a Fascist.
I agree that Roosevelt was a racist and I think his brand of passive antisemitism (e.g. not addressing the U.S.'s highly restrictive immigration quotas during the '30s; not clearing racist assholes like Breck Long out of the State Dept. until it was way too late) contributed significantly to the Holocaust's death toll. You've convinced me that he exhibited fascist-like behaviour but, on an overall basis, I think you'd have a hard time convincing many people that the correct label for Roosevelt is 'fascist'.
"We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office." - Aesop
"Only the dead have seen the end of war." - Plato
"If once a man indulges himself in murder, very soon he comes to think little of robbing; and from robbing he comes next to drinking and Sabbath-breaking, and from that to incivility and procrastination." - Thomas De Quincey
I agree that Roosevelt was a racist and I think his brand of passive antisemitism (e.g. not addressing the U.S.'s highly restrictive immigration quotas during the '30s; not clearing racist assholes like Breck Long out of the State Dept. until it was way too late) contributed significantly to the Holocaust's death toll. You've convinced me that he exhibited fascist-like behaviour but, on an overall basis, I think you'd have a hard time convincing many people that the correct label for Roosevelt is 'fascist'.
The majority of Congress, especially the Democrats of the day, were outright and open racists and Roosevelt had to deal with those people. Undoubtedly he had racist attitudes, conscious or unconscious, as did pretty well every American in those days. I was born in 1944 and grew up in a city with virtually 100% "white" people aside from a few Sikhs (who my dad called "Hindus") and had many unconscious racist attitudes inculcated in me because I lived in a casually and largely unconsciously racist society. Eventually I found out about thes attitudes and worked hard to change them, but I cannot claim that I don't have any racist attitudes because I likely still do have some that I am not aware of. If I find out about them I'll try to change them.
A racist, as I define the word, is someone who believes that there are "races" of human beings, which belief has been long proven incorrect by the science of genetics. In that technical sense I am not a racist.
What matters about Roosevelt is not what he was born as, but what he became. And what he became, among other things, was the saviour of the Capitalism of his day, although the Capitalists themselves did about everything possible to prevent him from doing that, and in the end he only did it with the aid of a terrible war.
But I understand early voting analysis in Nevada shows Latinos out voting in huge numbers (Have I got this right?)....for Hillary. Nevada, which had been red (Trump), is now apparently a toss-up. It looks like Florida is too.
As I understand it, Trump cannot win (Odds are very, very high) without winning BOTH Florida and Nevada. Do you know if this is the general consensus?
Lastly: Polls: I believe the Trump vote is being underestimated.
It is not because the pollsters are fouling up. They are counting right.
But Trump voters are lying to them.....they are worried about publicly acknowledging to anyone that they are going to vote for Trump. But in the secrecy and confidentiality of the election table, they are going to!
So I'm sticking with my Trump prediction!
Bob
Last edited by Bob Armstrong; Monday, 7th November, 2016, 09:53 AM.
Trump gets 270+ electoral college votes. Trump declares himself the winner.
Clinton gets 270+ electoral college votes, Trump declares himself the winner.
McMullin wins Utah, nobody gets 270+ electoral college votes, Trump declares himself the winner.
Tweet
Comment