Just talked to Garry at his home, where he's deluged with several rings of reporters. He was moved secretly to a different police station and then actually driven home in a colonel's car because they wanted to avoid all a big scene with all the media and supporters outside the jail. He sounds good, ready to spit fire in the pages of the Wall Street Journal. He said he had plenty of free time to work on an article. Not having a computer makes you much more productive! More here later but I thought y'all might want to know.
Thanks Mig for the update. CNN is doing a Special Report tomorrow evening, "Czar=Putin", good timing I'd say. Give 'em hell Garry!"
A word of support for Gary, and encouragement to Mig. Like Bruce says, Give 'em hell Gary.
CNN, aka Communist News Network doing a "Special Report on "Czar-Putin"...isn't that a hoot?!
Glad to hear Garry has been freed and is in good spirits. He's a very brave man.
Thanks Mig for reporting that Garry is well.
Go, Garry!
Garry couldn't get a better publicity. I bet he paid the "police state" to arrest him!
Just kidding, but I wish they would have allowed Karpov visit him and that unique jail house match could have happened.
It was a nice gesture by Karpov. I remember the days when they were such bitter rivals and enemies!
Hi Mig - Thank you very much for the update. I visited theotherrussia.org and dropped $50 in the kitty. Sorry it's not more. I really appreciate all you do for chess and freedom in Russia. Thank you for helping to take the time and educate folks as to what's really going on over there.
I express my support for Kasparov, and for a free and democratic Russia that would end Putin's dictatorship.
Keep taking the greatest precautions Garry. You are a very brave man. Your life is in danger. A threatened dictator will stop at nothing - we have Ilyumzhinov as an example.
"Not having a computer makes you much more productive!" Yes. No Daily Dirt!
"but I wish they would have allowed Karpov visit him and that unique jail house match could have happened"...perhaps it was Garry himself that turned Karpov away...he knows Keres was forced to throw those games to Botvinnik!
To Chesstraveler, yes, I understand your point very well! I feel FOX presents fair and balanced coverage, but I'm always willing to hear the other side.
To Bruce Towell and Chesstraveler,
"yes, I understand your point very well! I feel FOX presents fair and balanced coverage, but I'm always willing to hear the other side."
If FOX News is so fair and balanced, what "other side" needs to be heard? Doesn't fair and balanced imply that they are presenting BOTH sides?? Maybe FOX isn't so fair and balanced...
Evan, the "other side" is not the side opposite from FOX, but the side opposite of Chesstraveler and Bruce. They are probably thinking, "Rush Limbaugh? Conservative. CNN? Liberal. FOX? Fair and balanced. I like FOX, but I listen to the other side too."
Dan,
For the record I'm neither liberal or conservative. As I've stated before, I'm an independent and I don't listen to Rush Limbaugh, nor would I sanction his political views carte blanch. Do I think that Fox is fair and balanced, not entirely? I do believe it is closer to the goal of objective media reporting than either CNN or MSNBC, both of which have a considerable cultural liberal bias that permeates the majority of their reporting. Also, I will never accept that there is somehow a moral equivalency between the United States and terrorists. It's that particular type of reporting that I find offensive, so if you have to find the need to categorize and that makes me a conservative in your eyes...so be it. Perhaps when one expresses his/her opinion, a rush to judgement isn't always to most suitable reaction.
Haha... It always makes me laugh when anyone defends Fox News... Of course, all the major commercial outlets are as biased as each other. They are for-profit corporations. End of story.
Anyway, a little bit more on topic... Go Garry! There's a true freedom fighter that's making it happen. In America we have moronic actors pulling publicity stunts in the name of World Peace or Feeding Africa or whatever... In Russia you have the strongest chess player in history fighting the authoritarian regime!
What class. Go, Garry - you are doing in Russia what we revolutionaries in America cannot hope to achieve.
How American Americans can be. Fox News? At the far right end of the world, called the US? Journalism without an open mind is a nuisance.
Garry is far more important. How to counter Putin? It seems the opposition gathers around basic demands of democracy. Garry, go ahead. We're proud the way you're behaving now. Putin is secret police with a deep purse. No creativity, nothing special. Only brute force.
B T,
Talking in generalities is always an easy way to express oneself. What is it specifically that as a true American "revolutionary" you're trying to accomplish here in the U.S., but cannot achieve outside of all the "major commercial outlets?" I would really like to know so that I too may be enlightened and hold myself in such detached and high self-esteem.
> CNN? Liberal.
Not "liberal", ethically disgusting would be appropiate. You see, Pope and bin Laden are moral equivalents and all religions are equally inciting their adherents to violence.
That's why we see daily headlines about Baptists targeting Methodists, Presbyterians bloodily retaliating for the last Episcopalian attack, and
so on.
"all religions are equally inciting their adherents to violence". ??Hardly. There is no way that mainstream Christianity is equivalent in this respect to fanatical fundamentalist Islam.
But in terms of being BS, and psychologically damaging and brainwashing kids, I would agree that all religions are morally equivalent.
"Hardly. There is no way that mainstream Christianity is equivalent in this respect to fanatical fundamentalist Islam."
How about fanatical fundamentalist Christianity?
If you are comparing two distributions you cannot compare outliers from one to the 'mainstream; of the other.
"How about fanatical fundamentalist Christianity ?"
Have you seen Christian terrorists throwing planes full of civilians into buildings (like the Muslim terrorists did on September 11) ? Have you seen Christian terrorists blowing themselves up in a crowd of civilians (like the Muslim terrorists do often and try daily in Irak, Israel, Pakistan...) ? Have you seen Christian terrorists beheading hundreds of innocent people (like the Muslim terrorists do each day in Thailand, Filipino, Indonesia...) ?
Of course not, because there is no such thing as Christian terrorists.
Only Muslims exterminate people who are not sharing their beliefs. And they are doing this worldwide, all day long.
So, stop your ethically disgusting equivalence.
Before I write this, I realize that talking about politics on a chess forum is a mistake -- I only hope that Mig quickly updates with some snappy comments on the World Cup so we can leave this behind us, but...
No religion has a particular affinity with terrorism. At different points in history, in different places, Jews, Christians, and Muslims (and atheists) have been terrorists.
"Only Muslims exterminate people who are not sharing their beliefs. And they are doing this worldwide, all day long.
So, stop your ethically disgusting equivalence."
Please see:
http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=exterminate
Please wipe the foam around your mouth and stop yourself. Have a nice life.
There is no foam around my mouth.
I'm not the one making excuses for the barbaric Muslim terrorists who work for the worldwide extermination of Christians and Jews.
I'm against the new Nazis.
But you, obviously, not.
Sad for you.
"At different points in history, in different places, Jews, Christians, and Muslims (and atheists) have been terrorists."
That's a lie.
There has never been Christian or Jewish terrorists.
This is a disgusting propaganda fabricated by the pro-islamonazi liberals.
Mig, am I just imagining it, or in photos following his release from jail, does Kasparov's face look thinner? I was stunned by the report on ChessBase about his not being able to eat or drink anything supplied by the prison, for fear of being poisoned.
Leroidavid:
LOL...you're kidding, right?
"There has never been Christian or Jewish Terrorists"????
Ever heard of the Crusades? I suppose you will respond that they weren't terrorists because they were doing Gods Will, right?
One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.
Mig.
Please STOP talking about Kasparov....give us the necessary information . You should create an extra account KasparovNinja.com and talk whatever you want to about him over there, then you would find out how many people is interested in the ex champion.
"Of course not, because there is no such thing as Christian terrorists."
There have certainly been Christians who have committed acts of terrorism. Just look at all of bombings that took place in Northern Ireland, to use a recent example. Likewise, many of the Right-Wing paramilitary groups in Central America were comprised of deeply devout Christians.
One can look to the example of Eric Rudolph, as somebody who committed acts of terrorism and who was motivated by his interpretation of Christian theology. Also, remember that the KKK burned crosses, and maintained hatred of Jews and Catholics (aside from the lynchings of Blacks).
"No religion has a particular affinity with terrorism. At different points in history, in different places, Jews, Christians, and Muslims (and atheists) have been terrorists."
True enough, but most relevant is what is going on currently. Muslims perpetrate the majority of terrorist acts--more than everybody else combined. More importantly, at nearly every border of Islamdom, there exists tension with non-Islamic neighboring countries, which is expressed in acrimony, or outright bloodshed.
There are Muslim terrorists "fighting" because of grievances in Palestine, The Philipines, Thailand, Kashmir, Chechnya, etc.
DOug wrote: "There have certainly been Christians who have committed acts of terrorism. Just look at all of bombings that took place in Northern Ireland, to use a recent example. Likewise, many of the Right-Wing paramilitary groups in Central America were comprised of deeply devout Christians."
I certainly don't have enough of the historical details at my fingertips to discuss whether or not the Crusaders (for instance -- as somone else has suggested above) were "terrorists" (I rather suspect not: weren't they just Crusaders?) -- but DOug's proffering of the IRA helps make an important point. Yes, these were Christians (Catholics, to be specific), but isn't the issue not whether they were or weren't religious, but whether they committed terrorism in the name of religion per se. Religion is of course an incendiary issue in the "two" Irelands, and I suppose one can argue that all religion is, at root, political -- but I don't think anyone would claim that the IRA was blowing Englanders to smithereens through a predominantly religious motivation. This seems to me a crucial difference between the IRA and Al Qaeda, say.
Recently read a book titled 'The Dark Side of Christian History' that outlines a lot of atrocities perpetrated by offical Christendom and private Christians- Crusades, witch hunts, inquisitions etc. And of course the troubles in Northern Ireland (and the historical injustices that preceeded them) had something to do with Christianity.
There were militan entities called the Stern Gang, the Irgun etc- Jewish terrorist organisations. In fact, Menachem Begin was wanted for terrorist crimes by the British govt for many years.
So terrorism is not the excusive preserve of any religion.
Anyone remember the bombing of the King David Hotel? It sure was not done by Islamists.
And remember the Christian zealots who kill doctors who run abortion clinics in the US of A. And the Hindu fanatics who carried out pogroms of Muslims not too long ago.
All religions are capable of spawning violent ideologues and often do.Any system that elevates irrationality in the name of belief is but a short step away from irrational acions e.g. violence, dishonesty, chicanery etc
What's all this got to do with Gary Kasparov anyway? I hope the great man is enjoying a well deserved reprieve.
@HardyBerger
You make your point. All this has nothing to do with Garry Kasparov.
Let the others start their christian, jewish or muslim chess. With or without bombs.
The fox has left its lair.
@test
An attempt to find moral high ground for Cristianity or any other religion is the road to nowhere. There were atrocities committed in the name of any religion. The more powerful the religion were, the bigger the atrocities were committed. Certainly, the biggest atrocities were committed in the name of Cristianity, as it was historically the most powerful religion.
Let's recap: Crusades, inquisition, extermination of Inca and Maya civilizations, countless atrocities during the clashes between protestant and catholics everywhere in Europe. It's wonderful that Cristian priests no longer send people to die in the name of their religion, but the situation was quite different when they had a real power. So all good Christians out there, stop this "our religion is good, islam is bad nonsense".
It's religious fanaticism that leads to atrocities, not any particular religion.
Sorry, I really think we need to distinguish between different kinds of acts of violence. Not every crusade, inquisition, or war committed in the name of religion is de facto an act of religious terrorism. Shouldn't we be a little more nuanced here? It's useful to have different names for all these things.
"Not every crusade, inquisition, or war committed in the name of religion is de facto an act of religious terrorism. Shouldn't we be a little more nuanced here?"
In theory there is no difference between practice and theory, but in practice there is. So in theory you are right. In practice, however, you are not.
These are difficult questions and there are quite a few forums that deal with them and never talk about chess.
Could we try to not talk about religion here.
Ok, so when were there jewish terrorists? The Irgun weren't terrorists because they were targetting the British military and they didn't go into Britain and try to bomb the Brits.
osbender, zd and theorist are all right. Vrex is wrong.
Yes there are nuances. Yes all religions are capable, both in theory and practice, of fostering terrorism - and as various people have shown in this thread, all have. (Is Buddhism an exception, perhaps? Then again, no less than the Dalai Lama responded to the 9/11 attacks by saying in effect, "The U.S. had it coming to it." Of course, expressing verbal sympathy for terrorists isn't the same as practicing terrorism.)
But the important point is that debating the nuances leads to nothing but more debate - never to agreement.
Therefore, if consensus, or even eventual action, is needed, the right course is to stick with a simple conventional definition that's closest to the center of gravity - in other words, one that maximizes the likelihood that all can agree with it (perhaps with slight modifications).
Most of you probably realize that the definition of terrorism is a major bone of contention these days: The Islamofascists and their friends - all the Arab governments, most European intellectuals and American leftists - are trying to institutionalize (via various U.N. panels) a version that would define Israel as a "terrorist state" per se, for implementing security measures within civilian areas (where the real terrorists systematically hide weapons and prepare attacks).
So I say, let's stick with the conventional definition - equate terrorism with deadly political violence by non-state forces acting in concert, and whose targets are non-military in the strict sense. (In other words, anybody who says something like "There's no such thing as an innocent American (Israeli, etc.)", is a terrorist sympathizer, if not an outright terrorist.)
By that definition, underground Israel independence groups of the 1940s like the Irgun and the Stern Gang were indeed terrorist - from what I understand, they assassinated not just military officials or soldiers, but British political officials within Palestine as well. (Maybe they assassinated Arabs too.)
Yeah, even within terrorism I guess there are degrees. The Jewish terrorists didn't behead their victims on camera, or fly planes into buildings, or blow up crowded discotheques as far as I know, or go on search-and-destroy missions to find an unguarded mother and baby to behead or skewer (the latter is a routine tactic used by the oh-so-brave Al-Aqsa "Martyrs" and other organized groups in Palestine even today).
On the other hand, there have been Jewish terrorists who attacked crowded mosques. From what I know, they acted as individuals, and had no organization behind them. But they had plenty of sympathy within their (fringe) communities - as did the Jewish extremist who assassinated Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin for trying to make peace with the enemy. (Who else can you make peace with?)
"Mig.
Please STOP talking about Kasparov....give us the necessary information . You should create an extra account KasparovNinja.com and talk whatever you want to about him over there, then you would find out how many people is interested in the ex champion."
I'm sorry I thought this was Mig's blog, not yours. Since this is Mig's blog, Mig can talk about whatever Mig damn well pleases. Now shoo troll, shoo.
Ah, politics and religion. They threaten to destroy the planet. John Lennon said it best on 'Imagine'.
Unfortunately, the wonderful hopes, ideals and music of the 60's and early 70's are long behind us. Even Fischer seemed relatively sane then (or at least he was occasionally playing), reasonable people were in charge of FIDE and there was some sort of half decent system for the World Championship.
Perhaps already the only thing that has saved us was the stupendously good event of the collapse of the Soviet Union and its empire 1989-1991. Unfortunately, much of the promise of this event has since been lost. But if Russia should lapse back into a dictatorship, at least still free from the Kremlin's grasp are Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Ukraine, Belarus, Moldova, Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan in addition to the freed countries of Eastern Europe. Let's hope it stays this way.
"There are Muslim terrorists "fighting" because of grievances in Palestine, The Philipines, Thailand, Kashmir, Chechnya, etc."
These are political problems , not religious ... even if it suits your hatred , these people find refuge in extremist interpretation of their religion as people in despair and extreme poverty have always done since thousands of years ... people from every single religion including Christians and Jews (remember the terrorists of Irgoun and Stern , the ones who undertook Dalet plan or the one that assassinated Ithzak Rabbin )
Just one thing , Jews and Muslims have lived together in peace for centuries , when you expropriate illegally a people from a land he lived on for 1000 years , kill them everyday and do your best depicting them as subhumans or barbarians and leaving the status quo without sharing fairly , don't expect them to say thank you and bow down .
Mig how about closing the thread since it is no longer about the topic at all...
By the way, the British made the King David Hotel into a military target by operating special branch (intelligence) from the basement.
You can call anything you want a military target as long as you are both the judge and the jury. Alternatively, you just say that you did not mean it and call it 'collateral damage'.
Chris,
Yes, and luckily all of those countries have become bastions of progress and democracy.
anyone have info on the kasparov-karpov press conference cited on susan polgar's blog?
Good recap of the situation in Russia:
http://antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=11996
"I feel FOX presents fair and balanced coverage"
- from one of the many Real smart people who frequent this blog ...
ross,
Yes, of course some of these countries have serious problems. The problems in many African countries are even worse. I take it, then, that you would approve of Europe recolonising Africa.
No need to recolonize Africa - many European countries seem content to rape the countries you named of their oil wealth with the help of the Kremlin..but if it is important for you to think the former republics are much better off and that they are free from 'the Kremlin's grasp', don't let me bother you with facts.
ross,
Methinks you should ask the Estonians, Latvians, Lithuanians and a few others what they think of that.
Not to mention the Poles, Czechs, Slovaks, Hungarians, East Germans, Romanians and Bulgarians.
If you think that having the Soviet military 100 miles from the Rhine is a joke, you could not have not lived through those times as an adult, or you are Russian, or are of the hard left.
ross,
A few facts would be fun to hear, indeed.
jussu (an Estonian)
Remember Andrei Lugovoi, the former KGB agent who British prosecutors named the chief suspect in the murder of Alexander Litvinenko? (A few hours after meeting with Lugovoi, Litvinenko fell ill with polonium poisoning).
Breitbart reports that Lugovoi has just been elected to the Russian parliament.
Garry should give serious thought to teaming up now with Mr. Yavlinsky of the Yabloko party (economic liberals).
Ditch the communists (they are bad news), ditch Mr. "Limonov" (even worse), and forget about Other Russia.
Garry has enough name recognition in the West now that he would make a fine spokesman for Yabloko on Western television.
Five years from now, when Putin finally steps away from power or is assassinated, there will be war between the warring contenders to the throne.
If Yabloko, Yavlinsky and Kasparov can survive until after the smoke clears, there may be room for them in a hopefully more democratic Russia.
It's more a case of seeing if the Yabloko leadership will join up with us at this point. Their membership started long ago and a few regional leaders joined up months ago. Now that these "elections" have driven home the point that Putin isn't going to let them play anymore they may end up signing on for the real opposition. Nemtsov and the SPS took a while to come around, too, but are on board now. I respect them for trying to work within the system, but it took them far too long to admit the system isn't working anymore. Or, more to the point, that it works for the Kremlin full time.
The trick is, Other Russia isn't really a political party. It's a purely opposition movement, a coalition of parties. Limonov is welcome as are Nemtsov and Yavlinsky (well, "welcome" is a bit strong after all that has been said) because by signing on they are agreeing to a simple, non-ideological platform of free and fair elections and a free media. With such slim hopes as it is we can't afford to get picky about those who are willing to march. It's not an endorsement of Limonov's past or his politics or those of anyone else. It's simply an open door, and check your ideological baggage when you enter.
The real question is whether Zyuganov will also get the hint and do something with the Communists now that they were also cut down to size in the elections. Their membership is also impatient with getting shafted by every deal their leader has tried to cut with the Kremlin so far.
The point is that the more people who join under the basic "For Russia, Against Putin" banner, the harder it is for the Kremlin propaganda to paint everyone who doesn't praise the current system as a crazed enemy of the state (jackal, CIA agent, whatever's on channels 1 and 2 today). This is why we talk about a critical mass. Eventually it's "hey, my friend/brother/uncle voted for that guy/heard him talk/met some activists and he's not insane" and that spreads geometrically. With no access to mass media, grassroots is all we've got, so numbers are essential.
Yavlinsky is not quite welcome because he's said things; but Limonov is welcome, despite of the fact that he's done things...
Total. Insanity.
Here's the video of Limonov "having a good time with Karadzic and shooting at besieged Sarajevo during the Bosnian war" (as originally posted by acirce at chessgames.com):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yFQ12WjT6vY
I never thought I'd say this, but reading chessgames.com has become an intellectual relief compared to the Kasparov-related posts in DD lately.
You seem to have misunderstood my sarcasm and the phrase "open door." Obviously Yavlinksy isn't going to be turned away, as if we could stop people from marching even if we wanted to. The joke was that after all the criticism he's dumped on Other Russia even while his rank and file were joining us, he's not exactly going to get a cake and three kisses.
Blaming Kasparov, Other Russia, or the opposition movement in general for Limonov's actions in Sarajevo is bizarre. Garry was giving charity simuls in Croatia during that period! If he and his people march for democracy it's not our job to say he can't. We're not defending or endorsing his past or his politics or those of anyone else in the movement. We're simply doing. If you want to do what we do, great. Now that they've been shut out of the elections others are seeing the essential value of this non-ideological opposition concept.
Now I am a fan of Soviet military bases apparently. I take it, then, that the U.S. military bases in Europe/Asia are a joke? You bring me back to my original point though, which was to poke a little fun at your relatively pointless post regarding the big, bad Soviet Union (yes, it was big and bad, yes it is a good thing it is gone..can we move on now please?) in a typically Americanized way.
Look in the mirror at your own countries tacit support of corruption and human rights abuses in Uzbekistan and Azerbaijin for example, rather than wasting time pontificating about the evils of the Soviet Union.
Well of course Mig, it's quite easy to treat people like you do, censoring them, especially when they speak BEFORE Kasparov leaves politics, just saying and/or explaining that Kasparov was wrong. Nice way to behave.
Ruslan,
I'd find it quite difficult to treat people the way Mig does: opening up a forum for them, allowing them to relentlessly bash both himself and his patron.
It's not difficult to bash Mig for his ideas, but unless you're attempting to publish his USCF rating or using cuss-words you're probably not going to be censored on his forum.
Mr Koster,
I wrote a nice little text explaining, or at least giving my opinion for the reasons why Kasparov had lost all his credibility (if he ever had any) in Russia, on why democracy wasn't a goal in Russia, on why democracy couldn't be considered as a universal model worldwide. It was censored for a reason that I don't know.
Not only was it censored, but I also got zero feedback (I'm leaving my e-mail adress in every post I've made here. I guess that's the only reason why you may find the email adress field just below).
Therefore, I wasn't I bashing him or his patron (if Kasparov is his patron), and I wasn't talking about Mr Greengards rating (mine is around 2200 and I'm a patzer as well, so I have no reason to criticize others patzers), but I've been censored. Therefore I wrote the last few words.
Here you are.
I just wrote some words on how uncompatible was Kasparov's involvement in a so-called fight for freedom in Russia today. Uncompatible with an open support to the communists, for instance...
Wether you like it or not, Putin has a wide support in Russia, and I am convinced that russian people are not as stupid as you may imagine, and that most people show respect for Putin because he gave decent living standards to Russia.
I'm also convinced that if people have to choose between freedom and living standards, most of us will put freedom as a secondary need. It's nice to talk about philosophia, but it's way nicer when you do it with something in your stomach.
Ruslan,
I'd like to read your inappropriate missive. gregkoster at sbcglobal dot net.