| |
Main
Date: 22 Apr 2008 14:46:27
From: Sam Sloan
Subject: Texas Justice ??
|
Texas Justice ??
It is known and the sisters have confessed that Papa Polgar used to
beat them to force them to play chess and study chess and it was
living Hell to live in that home where they were not allowed to go out
and associate and play with other kids their ages. Of course, this is
what made them into great chess players. Otherwise, they would be
working as office secretaries somewhere today.
And now, Susan Polgar is applying to her children the same techniques
that were applied to her, forcing her kids to play chess. Problem is
that her kids are boys who are often not as compliant as girls and the
youngest one does not like chess and has complained to the
authorities.
What Larry Parr is missing is the big Texas case going on right now
where 416 children were taken from their parents and put into foster
care solely and entirely because their families were living in or
associated with a polygamous life style:
http://www.sltrib.com/ci_8989851
These 416 are in most cases refugees who escaped when a similar
compound was raided along the Arizona Utah border.
It is a funny coincidence that after being faced with child abuse
charges in New York, the Polgars moved to Texas too !!!
In the vast majority of countries and societies of the world polygamy
was practiced and in most cases still is. Here in the US it is not
allowed. Here, we only have girlfriends.
I have been doing research on my family history and I have found three
instances of my ancestors who had an unusually large number of
children.
All of them lived in the 1700s. None of them were related to each
other. None of them were involved in any funny religions. They were
all straight-line Methodists or Presbyterians. Some were preachers.
One of these was Andrew Graham who arrived in America in 1772. He was
married four times. Three of his wives were named Margaret. It is not
known when he married or divorced them, or when they died. He has more
than 7,000 descendants alive today, which may explain why there are so
many people nowadays named Graham.
I have a book out about this:
http://www.amazon.com/dp/0923891072
My research tends to show that most men had no children at all and a
few men had very large numbers of children, some men producing more
than 20 children.
My question is: Would the human race have survived at all and would
any of us be alive today had it not been for those few men who
produced large numbers of children?
The other question is: Some would say that Polgar is guilty of beating
his kids to force them to play chess. Suppose he beat the kids to
force them to learn their math tables or to do their homework or to
practice the piano. Would he still be considered guilty?
Sam Sloan
|
|
| |
PAUL TRUONG ANSWERS SAM SLOAN IN ANOTHER FORUM
No word can possibly describe you. What I find even more sickening is
there are actually a few derange people who pay attention to your
garbage. There is absolutely no truth to this nonsense. During a child
custody battle, the side which was ruled against made some wild
charges hoping to have some past court decisions relating to the case
reversed. There is not even an ounce of truth to the allegations. A
family court judge made a temporary order while waiting for an
investigation to be done and the order was promptly lifted once the
facts came out.
A thorough investigation was done by child protective services and
they concluded that there was absolutely no truth to the allegations.
In fact, the children clearly stated numerous times to the law
guardian and the representatives from child protective services that
they were told to say this and they would get lots of toys if they do.
They were around 6 and 7 years old at that time. Even the children=92s
teacher testified in court that there was absolutely no truth to this
because the children told her what actually happened. Not a single
person collaborated with the person who made these false charges.
ALL CHARGES WERE DROPPED. In fact, the same person who made these
bogus charges agreed to drop the charges. But what do you care about
the truth, right?
In spite of being smeared by this individual repeatedly, Susan has
displayed class and dignity by refusing to say anything negative about
this individual publicly for the sake of her children.
You are a despicable human being for involving innocent children in
your personal and twisted agenda. After knowing the truth, you still
continue to spread your lies. Why don't you do something useful like
go get a job to properly support your family? What's worse is the
entire board majority was told of the facts and they still continue to
allow this kind of deliberate lies to continue to circulate for their
own agenda while the USCF is $200,000 in the hole in this fiscal year.
This is Susan Polgar's response on another forum:
"I am quite appalled by the disgusting tactic displayed by some
posters here. Do you have no shame? How low are you willing to stoop?
My children are currently living happily with my husband and I in
Texas. They are excellent students and they make the honor roll each
semester since they have been here.
If the charges are true, do you honestly think that a judge would
allow my relocation with my family to Texas to happen? CPS did a
thorough investigation of these completely fabricated charges. They
interviewed my children numerous times. They also interviewed their
school teachers, school nurse, doctors, and school principal, etc. Do
you think that CPS would not step in to prevent this if the charges
are true? All the bogus charges were dropped.
And people wonder why so many good people walked away and giving up on
the USCF."
In a message dated 4/22/2008 8:24:03 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
[email protected] writes:
Texas Justice ??
It is known and the sisters have confessed that Papa Polgar used to
beat them to force them to play chess and study chess and it was
living Hell to live in that home where they were not allowed to go out
and associate and play with other kids their ages. Of course, this is
what made them into great chess players. Otherwise, they would be
working as office secretaries somewhere today.
And now, Susan Polgar is applying to her children the same techniques
that were applied to her, forcing her kids to play chess. Problem is
that her kids are boys who are often not as compliant as girls and the
youngest one does not like chess and has complained to the
authorities.
What Larry Parr is missing is the big Texas case going on right now
where 416 children were taken from their parents and put into foster
care solely and entirely because their families were living in or
associated with a polygamous life style:
Sam Sloan wrote:
> Texas Justice ??
>
> It is known and the sisters have confessed that Papa Polgar used to
> beat them to force them to play chess and study chess and it was
> living Hell to live in that home where they were not allowed to go out
> and associate and play with other kids their ages. Of course, this is
> what made them into great chess players. Otherwise, they would be
> working as office secretaries somewhere today.
>
> And now, Susan Polgar is applying to her children the same techniques
> that were applied to her, forcing her kids to play chess. Problem is
> that her kids are boys who are often not as compliant as girls and the
> youngest one does not like chess and has complained to the
> authorities.
>
> What Larry Parr is missing is the big Texas case going on right now
> where 416 children were taken from their parents and put into foster
> care solely and entirely because their families were living in or
> associated with a polygamous life style:
>
> http://www.sltrib.com/ci_8989851
>
> These 416 are in most cases refugees who escaped when a similar
> compound was raided along the Arizona Utah border.
>
> It is a funny coincidence that after being faced with child abuse
> charges in New York, the Polgars moved to Texas too !!!
>
> In the vast majority of countries and societies of the world polygamy
> was practiced and in most cases still is. Here in the US it is not
> allowed. Here, we only have girlfriends.
>
> I have been doing research on my family history and I have found three
> instances of my ancestors who had an unusually large number of
> children.
>
> All of them lived in the 1700s. None of them were related to each
> other. None of them were involved in any funny religions. They were
> all straight-line Methodists or Presbyterians. Some were preachers.
> One of these was Andrew Graham who arrived in America in 1772. He was
> married four times. Three of his wives were named Margaret. It is not
> known when he married or divorced them, or when they died. He has more
> than 7,000 descendants alive today, which may explain why there are so
> many people nowadays named Graham.
>
> I have a book out about this:
>
> http://www.amazon.com/dp/0923891072
>
> My research tends to show that most men had no children at all and a
> few men had very large numbers of children, some men producing more
> than 20 children.
>
> My question is: Would the human race have survived at all and would
> any of us be alive today had it not been for those few men who
> produced large numbers of children?
>
> The other question is: Some would say that Polgar is guilty of beating
> his kids to force them to play chess. Suppose he beat the kids to
> force them to learn their math tables or to do their homework or to
> practice the piano. Would he still be considered guilty?
>
> Sam Sloan
|
| | |
:
BETTERING BOT
We wrote, as quoted by Greg Kennedy: "I was
right to condemn a few days back the ready habit to
employ a U.S. court action to condemn automatically
parents for what they may or may not be doing. In
this instance, Sam probably unwittingly adopted the
same tactic that several people on this and other forums
employed against him when he 'kidnapped' his daughter."
That adds up to: TWO WRONGS ARE TWO WRONGS.
Responds our Greg, "The old two-wrongs-make-a-right fallacy.
If Mr. Sloan was [sic] wrong, let's just own up to it." (Greg needs
to learn the subjunctive.)
Our claim was the precise opposite of Greg's
mendacious assertion, though it's possible he could
not think his way through the disputation and wasn't lying.
In our exchanges with Taylor Kingston, we have
been citing several historical works. The purpose was
less to inform Kingston than to provide the beginnings
of a reading list for Greg Kennedy. Thus far, of the
many book titles that we adduced, the work that he
might turn to is Vera Brittain's "Testament of Youth"
for a beginning of his education about the 20th century.
A while back we mentioned Max Beerbohm's "Zuleika
Dobson" an elegantly penned novel that appeared
in 1911, the same year as the Britannica's famous
11th edition.
Our first assignment to Greg, if he were of a
mind to improve himself, would be to compare and
contrast the civilizational assumptions to be found in
Brittain's memoir and Beerbohm's novel -- thence to
read the entry on civilization and progress in the
Britannica's 11th edition. That would constitute a
beginning for understanding the intellectual
consequences of World War I -- consequencs that would
work themselves out in politics and concrete human
suffering over the next seven or so decades.
Someone suggested that we begin first with
Barbara Tuchman's "Proud Tower" before assigning
primary source material to Greg. We respectfully
disagree. Give him an initial dip in primary
materials, and he will be better equipped to handle
Tuchman's synthesizing history. Whereupon, we
immerse the man once again in primary sources.
Agreed?
Yours, Larry Parr
help bot wrote:
> On Apr 23, 12:06 am, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > If Paul Truong's statement is accurate -- and I
> > think the chances are high that it is
>
> Note the lies, fabrications and misrepresentations
> on the SP Web site-- could these be the handiwork
> of the same man upon whose testimony LP is now
> relying?
>
>
> > -- then I was
> > right to condemn a few days back the ready habit to
> > employ a U.S. court action to condemn automatically
> > parents for what they may or may not be doing.
> >
> > In this instance, Sam probably unwittingly
> > adopted the same tactic that several people on this
> > and other forums employed against him when he
> > "kidnapped" his daughter.
>
> The old two-wrongs-make-a-right fallacy. If Mr.
> Sloan was wrong, let's just own up to it.
>
>
> > My point earlier was that it was morally
> > dangerous to pry through the written word into the
> > lives of families without a full knowledge of
> > circumstances and hard facts. I noted that EVEN IF
> > the Tabasco charge were true and acted upon by an
> > American court, there was likely far more to the story.
>
> That's not what I read; what I read was a sort of
> dissertation on Libertarian values, with an extra bit
> thrown in for good measure, about how it was okay
> to hot-sauce children because after all, they do it
> in Asia.
>
>
> > In this instance, it appears that the basic
> > charge, regardless of familial circumstances, was
> > untrue. That Mr. Truong waited until he had his ducks
> > properly lined up to respond suggests both a strong
> > human spirit on his and Susan Polgar's part and a
> > surprising degree of professionalism.
>
> It would greatly surprise me if the creators of the
> horror that is SP's Web site could somehow manage
> to get even two ducks in a row.
>
>
> > I am not at all sure that I could have kept my cool
> > and my keyboard quiet until the correct moment, had I
> > been in his position.
>
> I would say that it is a near certainty that LP could
> not keep his cool; instead, he would very likely fire
> off some ad hominem "hot sauce" fireballs.
>
>
> -- help bot
|
| | |
Date: 22 Apr 2008 21:26:16
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Texas Justice ??
|
On Apr 23, 12:06 am, "[email protected]" <[email protected] > wrote:
> If Paul Truong's statement is accurate -- and I
> think the chances are high that it is
Note the lies, fabrications and misrepresentations
on the SP Web site-- could these be the handiwork
of the same man upon whose testimony LP is now
relying?
> -- then I was
> right to condemn a few days back the ready habit to
> employ a U.S. court action to condemn automatically
> parents for what they may or may not be doing.
>
> In this instance, Sam probably unwittingly
> adopted the same tactic that several people on this
> and other forums employed against him when he
> "kidnapped" his daughter.
The old two-wrongs-make-a-right fallacy. If Mr.
Sloan was wrong, let's just own up to it.
> My point earlier was that it was morally
> dangerous to pry through the written word into the
> lives of families without a full knowledge of
> circumstances and hard facts. I noted that EVEN IF
> the Tabasco charge were true and acted upon by an
> American court, there was likely far more to the story.
That's not what I read; what I read was a sort of
dissertation on Libertarian values, with an extra bit
thrown in for good measure, about how it was okay
to hot-sauce children because after all, they do it
in Asia.
> In this instance, it appears that the basic
> charge, regardless of familial circumstances, was
> untrue. That Mr. Truong waited until he had his ducks
> properly lined up to respond suggests both a strong
> human spirit on his and Susan Polgar's part and a
> surprising degree of professionalism.
It would greatly surprise me if the creators of the
horror that is SP's Web site could somehow manage
to get even two ducks in a row.
> I am not at all sure that I could have kept my cool
> and my keyboard quiet until the correct moment, had I
> been in his position.
I would say that it is a near certainty that LP could
not keep his cool; instead, he would very likely fire
off some ad hominem "hot sauce" fireballs.
-- help bot
|
| | |
LEAVE THE KIDS OUT OF IT!
Dear Phil Innes,
If Paul Truong's statement is accurate -- and I
think the chances are high that it is -- then I was
right to condemn a few days back the ready habit to
employ a U.S. court action to condemn automatically
parents for what they may or may not be doing.
In this instance, Sam probably unwittingly
adopted the same tactic that several people on this
and other forums employed against him when he
"kidnapped" his daughter.
My point earlier was that it was morally
dangerous to pry through the written word into the
lives of families without a full knowledge of
circumstances and hard facts. I noted that EVEN IF
the Tabasco charge were true and acted upon by an
American court, there was likely far more to the story.
In this instance, it appears that the basic
charge, regardless of familial circumstances, was
untrue. That Mr. Truong waited until he had his ducks
properly lined up to respond suggests both a strong
human spirit on his and Susan Polgar's part and a
surprising degree of professionalism.
I am not at all sure that I could have kept my cool
and my keyboard quiet until the correct moment, had I
been in his position.
Yours, Larry Parr
Chess One wrote:
> <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> PAUL TRUONG ANSWERS SAM SLOAN IN ANOTHER FORUM
>
>
> ALL CHARGES WERE DROPPED. In fact, the same person who made these
> bogus charges agreed to drop the charges. But what do you care about
> the truth, right?
>
> ---
>
> Dear Larry Parr,
>
> You may have noted my challenges here recently to specific persons on these
> issues; those who proposed charges but knowingly repressed the knowledge of
> their results. Or was their intention to investigate actually as they
> proposed it of themselves, and they cared not to look further other than to
> amplify accusation while repressing the result of it?
>
> It is merely disgusting that anyone could call themselves 'journalist' after
> that, or respecters of any rule of law which is a minimum standard, never
> mind that higher level which is common decency! And disgust is what we have
> become accustomed upon.
>
> And this is merely the /public/ level of exchange of those who would declare
> their orientation in a proxy war. Like you, I opt for full disclosure of the
> whole issue, but unlike you - and here we have a difference, a large one - I
> cannot like what Sam Sloan does in his investigative mode, since I cannot
> distinguish that from a McCarthyist adventurism into chess politics.
>
> Younger people will not know what that is, but we do, and we know what it
> did. What it does now for USCF it then did to the country, it divided and
> made it doubt itself for a decade, and the cold war was all the colder for
> that.
>
> These excursions are some desperate remedy, [really! off any scale] and are
> themselves worse than the addressed complaint, bad as those are - though it
> is a permitted measure by those who pull the strings, and /timor addidit
> alas/ employs Puppet Sloan to /divertisments/ to switch languages, but back
> again, which have the effect of /suppressio veri/.
>
> And that is what complainant Sloan does not understand, that he is the
> stalking horse for a habit of control he does not even acknowledge but which
> works him; and after some year long engagement, neither do I feel he wishes
> to understand, the moment being of greater force, though acting this way is
> destructive of whatever he thinks he loves and would sustain about chess.
>
> And this is merely of the complainant's psycho-pathology! And that does not
> deserve reprobation as much as much needed understanding both
> psychologically and externally, of what a political puppet must inevitably
> become - and the usual fate of the stalking horse.
>
> The crime here is not perpetrated by the evident agent, who I suggest is
> grandiloquently insensible to his manipulation, but the result of it is an
> indifference to chess in preference to an attendant fame he thinks is his
> bequest and project will be his just reward.
>
> The real criminal minds are not yet described or revealed in this scene.
>
> Cordially, Phil Innes
|
| | | |
Date: 23 Apr 2008 08:55:06
From: Chess One
Subject: Re: Texas Justice ??
|
<[email protected] > wrote in message
news:0ae34296-deab-473f-84a2-d565ed0989cc@f36g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> LEAVE THE KIDS OUT OF IT!
>
> Dear Phil Innes,
>
> If Paul Truong's statement is accurate -- and I
> think the chances are high that it is -- then I was
> right to condemn a few days back the ready habit to
> employ a U.S. court action to condemn automatically
> parents for what they may or may not be doing.
Dear Larry Parr,
There are those who do not chose to 'notice' its accuracy, yet have received
direct information which attests to its detail. To then proceed /as if/ such
material is unknown, and indeed as if the issue is unresolved, is more than
a bone of contention, that is a form of wilfull distortion for the purpose
of recreating a 'political thriller', and nevermind the casual victims.
To think any of my recent correspondents here by virtue of their own writing
know of or even care for the well-being of children, is not to gild the
lily, but to coat the rhubarb leaf with another substance! That is the issue
against public decency in reporting I mentioned.
> In this instance, Sam probably unwittingly
> adopted the same tactic that several people on this
> and other forums employed against him when he
> "kidnapped" his daughter.
We do know that morals stem from 'mores', or custom, and there is no
necessary good or bad in any custom, but what is customary has no bearing on
what is adjudged fit, which instead we call 'ethics'. As such, there is not
even any thought attending on 'morals', and instead we witness habit.
Sometimes such habit is a settled one of morose and misanthropic nature, but
even though it is literally thoughtless it still exists within the checks
and balances of useful inhibition - a strong taboo against the involvement
of innocents shames the conscience, no?
At least, that was always the state of Western culture during the age when
children were seperated from the realm of adults, which is precisely the
literary age when we chose to educate them. That age is now so diminished we
might say it no longer exists, and there is no shield or membrane separating
adults and children in the tv-age, where anyone of any age is spared no
illusion to what are often tawdry adult concerns.
> My point earlier was that it was morally
> dangerous to pry through the written word into the
> lives of families without a full knowledge of
> circumstances and hard facts. I noted that EVEN IF
> the Tabasco charge were true and acted upon by an
> American court, there was likely far more to the story.
>
> In this instance, it appears that the basic
> charge, regardless of familial circumstances, was
> untrue. That Mr. Truong waited until he had his ducks
> properly lined up to respond suggests both a strong
> human spirit on his and Susan Polgar's part and a
> surprising degree of professionalism.
Yes.
Some of 'us' who have bothered to note the character of the players in the
on-going drama, have bothered to inform our intelligence with the result of
that 'looking'. If it is your point that this is simply responsible adult
behavior, I agree with you.
> I am not at all sure that I could have kept my cool
> and my keyboard quiet until the correct moment, had I
> been in his position.
Quite so. The dilemma being further exposure of one's family or, as it
appears took place, a noble silence.
---
Dr. Neil Postman in 1975 wrote a devastating and very thorough book titled
'The End of Childhood', a title of some 750 words, tracing what constituted
childhood, its origins, worth, and evolution from approximately Elizabethan
times in Europe. He also reported on its decay and destruction; sometimes
from a casual indifference in the modern pysche to any sort of culture at
all, or to anything but egoic behaviors; and he also reported on the
deliberated obfustication of what society had evolved for some 500 years as
a means to allow children to individuate themselves before entering the
adult world. That latter point, says Postman, is not intended to be for the
child's benefit, but is a low attempt at exploitation, for usually fiduciary
of venal purposes.
That is the not the issue here. But that is the context of the culture in
which the issue exists.
I hope that other readers in these newsgroups will attend on your comments;
so that they will see an /indicated/ need for reserving comment before
launching yet another spate of enthusiasticly blind 'investigations.'
That is, if they actually care for anything in the above, and if they wish
to be considered as adults human beings by their peers.
Cordially, Phil Innes
> Yours, Larry Parr
>
>
> Chess One wrote:
>> <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>> PAUL TRUONG ANSWERS SAM SLOAN IN ANOTHER FORUM
>>
>>
>> ALL CHARGES WERE DROPPED. In fact, the same person who made these
>> bogus charges agreed to drop the charges. But what do you care about
>> the truth, right?
>>
>> ---
>>
>> Dear Larry Parr,
>>
>> You may have noted my challenges here recently to specific persons on
>> these
>> issues; those who proposed charges but knowingly repressed the knowledge
>> of
>> their results. Or was their intention to investigate actually as they
>> proposed it of themselves, and they cared not to look further other than
>> to
>> amplify accusation while repressing the result of it?
>>
>> It is merely disgusting that anyone could call themselves 'journalist'
>> after
>> that, or respecters of any rule of law which is a minimum standard, never
>> mind that higher level which is common decency! And disgust is what we
>> have
>> become accustomed upon.
>>
>> And this is merely the /public/ level of exchange of those who would
>> declare
>> their orientation in a proxy war. Like you, I opt for full disclosure of
>> the
>> whole issue, but unlike you - and here we have a difference, a large
>> one - I
>> cannot like what Sam Sloan does in his investigative mode, since I cannot
>> distinguish that from a McCarthyist adventurism into chess politics.
>>
>> Younger people will not know what that is, but we do, and we know what it
>> did. What it does now for USCF it then did to the country, it divided and
>> made it doubt itself for a decade, and the cold war was all the colder
>> for
>> that.
>>
>> These excursions are some desperate remedy, [really! off any scale] and
>> are
>> themselves worse than the addressed complaint, bad as those are - though
>> it
>> is a permitted measure by those who pull the strings, and /timor addidit
>> alas/ employs Puppet Sloan to /divertisments/ to switch languages, but
>> back
>> again, which have the effect of /suppressio veri/.
>>
>> And that is what complainant Sloan does not understand, that he is the
>> stalking horse for a habit of control he does not even acknowledge but
>> which
>> works him; and after some year long engagement, neither do I feel he
>> wishes
>> to understand, the moment being of greater force, though acting this way
>> is
>> destructive of whatever he thinks he loves and would sustain about chess.
>>
>> And this is merely of the complainant's psycho-pathology! And that does
>> not
>> deserve reprobation as much as much needed understanding both
>> psychologically and externally, of what a political puppet must
>> inevitably
>> become - and the usual fate of the stalking horse.
>>
>> The crime here is not perpetrated by the evident agent, who I suggest is
>> grandiloquently insensible to his manipulation, but the result of it is
>> an
>> indifference to chess in preference to an attendant fame he thinks is his
>> bequest and project will be his just reward.
>>
>> The real criminal minds are not yet described or revealed in this scene.
>>
>> Cordially, Phil Innes
|
| | |
Date: 22 Apr 2008 17:11:02
From: Chess One
Subject: Re: Texas Justice ??
|
<[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
PAUL TRUONG ANSWERS SAM SLOAN IN ANOTHER FORUM
ALL CHARGES WERE DROPPED. In fact, the same person who made these
bogus charges agreed to drop the charges. But what do you care about
the truth, right?
---
Dear Larry Parr,
You may have noted my challenges here recently to specific persons on these
issues; those who proposed charges but knowingly repressed the knowledge of
their results. Or was their intention to investigate actually as they
proposed it of themselves, and they cared not to look further other than to
amplify accusation while repressing the result of it?
It is merely disgusting that anyone could call themselves 'journalist' after
that, or respecters of any rule of law which is a minimum standard, never
mind that higher level which is common decency! And disgust is what we have
become accustomed upon.
And this is merely the /public/ level of exchange of those who would declare
their orientation in a proxy war. Like you, I opt for full disclosure of the
whole issue, but unlike you - and here we have a difference, a large one - I
cannot like what Sam Sloan does in his investigative mode, since I cannot
distinguish that from a McCarthyist adventurism into chess politics.
Younger people will not know what that is, but we do, and we know what it
did. What it does now for USCF it then did to the country, it divided and
made it doubt itself for a decade, and the cold war was all the colder for
that.
These excursions are some desperate remedy, [really! off any scale] and are
themselves worse than the addressed complaint, bad as those are - though it
is a permitted measure by those who pull the strings, and /timor addidit
alas/ employs Puppet Sloan to /divertisments/ to switch languages, but back
again, which have the effect of /suppressio veri/.
And that is what complainant Sloan does not understand, that he is the
stalking horse for a habit of control he does not even acknowledge but which
works him; and after some year long engagement, neither do I feel he wishes
to understand, the moment being of greater force, though acting this way is
destructive of whatever he thinks he loves and would sustain about chess.
And this is merely of the complainant's psycho-pathology! And that does not
deserve reprobation as much as much needed understanding both
psychologically and externally, of what a political puppet must inevitably
become - and the usual fate of the stalking horse.
The crime here is not perpetrated by the evident agent, who I suggest is
grandiloquently insensible to his manipulation, but the result of it is an
indifference to chess in preference to an attendant fame he thinks is his
bequest and project will be his just reward.
The real criminal minds are not yet described or revealed in this scene.
Cordially, Phil Innes
|
| | |
Date: 22 Apr 2008 08:57:50
From: samsloan
Subject: Re: Texas Justice ??
|
I see it now. It is at:
http://www.chessdiscussion.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1069&start=60
I can tell you from experience that it could not possibly have
happened the way Truong describes.
I have this nutcase named Dorchen Leidholdt who had been making all
kinds of allegations against me for the past 17 years.
http://www.anusha.com/dorchen-for-web.jpg
Although she had managed to get me arrested about five times (I have
lost count) she has never been able to get a thorough investigation
like the one described above by Truong launched.
The courts and the Child Protective Services must have had some
evidence much stronger than a mere allegation from the opponent in a
child custody suit to issue orders of protection and to do what they
did.
Sam Sloan
|
| |
Date: 22 Apr 2008 07:57:43
From: J.D. Walker
Subject: Re: Texas Justice ??
|
Sam Sloan wrote:
> Texas Justice ??
>
> It is known and the sisters have confessed that Papa Polgar used to
> beat them to force them to play chess and study chess and it was
> living Hell to live in that home where they were not allowed to go out
> and associate and play with other kids their ages. Of course, this is
> what made them into great chess players. Otherwise, they would be
> working as office secretaries somewhere today.
>
> And now, Susan Polgar is applying to her children the same techniques
> that were applied to her, forcing her kids to play chess. Problem is
> that her kids are boys who are often not as compliant as girls and the
> youngest one does not like chess and has complained to the
> authorities.
>
> What Larry Parr is missing is the big Texas case going on right now
> where 416 children were taken from their parents and put into foster
> care solely and entirely because their families were living in or
> associated with a polygamous life style:
>
> http://www.sltrib.com/ci_8989851
>
> These 416 are in most cases refugees who escaped when a similar
> compound was raided along the Arizona Utah border.
>
> It is a funny coincidence that after being faced with child abuse
> charges in New York, the Polgars moved to Texas too !!!
>
> In the vast majority of countries and societies of the world polygamy
> was practiced and in most cases still is. Here in the US it is not
> allowed. Here, we only have girlfriends.
>
> I have been doing research on my family history and I have found three
> instances of my ancestors who had an unusually large number of
> children.
>
> All of them lived in the 1700s. None of them were related to each
> other. None of them were involved in any funny religions. They were
> all straight-line Methodists or Presbyterians. Some were preachers.
> One of these was Andrew Graham who arrived in America in 1772. He was
> married four times. Three of his wives were named Margaret. It is not
> known when he married or divorced them, or when they died. He has more
> than 7,000 descendants alive today, which may explain why there are so
> many people nowadays named Graham.
>
> I have a book out about this:
>
> http://www.amazon.com/dp/0923891072
>
> My research tends to show that most men had no children at all and a
> few men had very large numbers of children, some men producing more
> than 20 children.
>
> My question is: Would the human race have survived at all and would
> any of us be alive today had it not been for those few men who
> produced large numbers of children?
>
> The other question is: Some would say that Polgar is guilty of beating
> his kids to force them to play chess. Suppose he beat the kids to
> force them to learn their math tables or to do their homework or to
> practice the piano. Would he still be considered guilty?
>
> Sam Sloan
Umm, suppose someone beat their kids to make them into soldiers...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZQVz2XVbew
--
"Do that which is right..."
Rev. J.D. Walker
|
|
