chessgames.com
Members · Prefs · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing

 
Chessgames.com User Profile Chessforum
twinlark
Member since Nov-17-05
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

My wrap of our Chessgames Challenge: The World vs A Nickel, 2006 against ICCF Grandmaster Arno Nickel is at User: World Team Tribute.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

<The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.>

― Geoffrey Chaucer, The Parliament of Birds

>> Click here to see twinlark's game collections.

Chessgames.com Full Member

   twinlark has kibitzed 17527 times to chessgames   [more...]
   May-23-16 European Individual Championship (2016) (replies)
 
twinlark: <notyetagm: Top 23 wins invitations to the 2017 World Cup> Navara and possibly Wojtaszek might make it into the World Cup on the basis of ratings. If that is the case, then Ter-Sahakyan and Lupulescu might still qualify.
 
   May-20-16 twinlark chessforum (replies)
 
twinlark: Did Frontline talk about the financing and resources if ISIS? For it to grow it needed to recruit members and to attract major sponsorship.
 
   May-16-16 keypusher chessforum (replies)
 
twinlark: <keypusher> You might be interested in this: http://www.unz.com/article/the-iq-g...
 
   May-07-16 Annie K. chessforum (replies)
 
twinlark: <<Also, are we still waiting for feedback from <twinlark>?> He seems to be busy, but we're in no hurry.> Sorry. I am actually on the job. I'll try to be quick.
 
   Apr-20-16 Kenneth Rogoff (replies)
 
twinlark: <Colonel Mortimer: <twinlark:> +1:)> Well and good. Catch you later and elsewhere!
 
   Apr-20-16 Big Pawn chessforum (replies)
 
twinlark: TF is coming here to return BP's back rubs. Carry on, guys. Always good to see a nice bromance.
 
   Apr-19-16 TheFocus chessforum (replies)
 
twinlark: I see you lads have formed a mutual admiration society. Let me leave this page so that you can enjoy each other in the privacy of this forum.
 
   Apr-17-16 Abdel Irada chessforum (replies)
 
...
 
   Apr-15-16 Kibitzer's Café (replies)
 
twinlark: A cake stall, even. The country's bankrupt.
 
   Apr-14-16 Sergey Karjakin (replies)
 
twinlark: Response at Rogoff page.
 
(replies) indicates a reply to the comment.

Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 272 OF 272 ·  Later Kibitzing>
May-11-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  Boomie: <visayanbraindoctor: <Boomie> I hope you read the above article.>

Thanks for the link. The article makes a good point. Detecting things that should be present but aren't is difficult. The silence in the MSM and from the State Dept. makes about as much sense as the "Polish training" off the Russian coast. We should try to keep in mind that people who are attracted to elected offices are not particularly smart.

I should clarify myself a bit to address assumptions that have been made about me. I've been a member of the counter culture all my adult life. I was a hippie games player throughout the 70's. I worked at a food coop for a number of years and then slowly made my way into the computer programming world. The hippie presence in both gaming and computers is an artifact of the 70's.

I agree with Ralph Nader concerning American politics. It doesn't matter which party is in power. They are all owned by the corporations. This sadly seems more true today than when Nader ran his spirited campaign. I rarely vote in elections except when I really hate the other guy. For example, Carter vs Reagan. Reagan scared the bejabers out of me when he was Governor of California and it was a white knuckle ride for me during his presidency. He was an actor following a script written, apparently, by Mormons. Almost his entire cabinet were Mormons. Totally scary.

I don't follow the news closely. So I have no clue who all the players in Syria are. Clearly, returning to square one would be an excellent outcome from here, Assad and all...He would then set about arresting his enemies both real and imagined in the inimitable Assad fashion. But at least then you would know who the players are. The current chaotic situation can't be managed with diplomacy.

May-12-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  visayanbraindoctor: <Boomie: Assad and all...He would then set about arresting his enemies both real and imagined in the inimitable Assad fashion.>

It is these kinds of statements from you that lead me to believe that you get all your news from one side of the corporate media fence. If you read articles from secular Syrian sources, it would become obvious even to you that you've been lied to by the corporate media. Assad isn't that kind of character.

I can recall that you swallowed all that MSM propaganda about Putin being a thug. If you would even listen to him speak, you'll quickly find out that he not a thug. I find him to be the most intelligent, sophisticated, and subtle among world leaders today.

Likewise, if you actually listen to Assad speak, you'll quickly find out that he is a highly educated and cultured man, not the stereotypical brutal dictator that MSM always paints him to be.

In fact my personal impression is that both Putin and Assad are more intelligent, knowledgeable, and consistent than US President Obama.

<They are all owned by the corporations.>

I would suggest that you start from this idea. These same corporations own the main stream mass media, which is precisely why many refer to MSM as the corporate media. If you get all your news from them, then you'll just get a pretty one sided view of politics. Both Putin and Assad are in their way. Do you honestly think MSM will report on them objectively?

For starters IMO you should begin reading articles by secular Syrians.

https://www.almasdarnews.com/

is one good source. I have found out that it's level headed and tries to verify its news with actual sources within Syria.

May-12-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  Boomie: <visayanbraindoctor> I'm not sure why my relationship to the news is important to you. To simplify, since apparently my description of myself did not register, I don't believe any source of news. I do believe some history. That is, news that has stood the test of time. You apparently aren't aware that the Assad dictatorship, including his father, has routinely suppressed any hint of opposition. " In both the Syrian presidential election, 2000 and subsequent 2007 election, Bashar Assad received votes in his favor in the upper 90th percentile in uncontested elections where other candidates were not permitted to run against him." (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basha...). That's all you need to know about Assad. If you don't like that Wiki article, you can rewrite it. Otherwise acknowledge that Assad and his father were brutal dictators. That is what history says about them.
May-12-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  visayanbraindoctor: <Boomie>

Your last post looks to me as if you do not know what you're talking about when it comes to Syria.

Before you accuse me of the same, I suggest that you scroll the several pages of discussion that I and <twinlark> have already posted on Syria above.

I'm going to pass debating with you here. If you wish to further discuss the situation in Syria, I would request that you follow my suggestion, and <twinlark's>, and read alternative sources first. (I do not mean politically loaded articles in Wikipedia.)

May-13-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  visayanbraindoctor: <twinlark> Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff just gotten impeached. What's happening there?
May-13-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  visayanbraindoctor: https://www.rt.com/news/342983-syri...

http://www.businessinsider.in/Russi...

The contrast between the perspectives these two articles represent is obvious.

<Boomie> rather than debate with you on Syria, I would suggest that you read articles like former.

If I must say so, most of what you have posted in the past several months look as if they are essentially copy-pasted from MSM sources, and carry the same politico-psychological line as the latter article above. If you read nothing but these sources, you might end up with the conclusion that Assad is the bad guy, and some sugar coated Wahabbi sects are the good guys.

I'm not trying to offend you here. Just trying to tell you that there are other viewpoints out there, and that you should also read them.

May-13-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  Boomie: <visayanbraindoctor: most of what you have posted in the past several months look as if they are essentially copy-pasted from MSM sources>

I wasn't aware that Wikipedia was MSM. There are 307 citations in the article on Assad. I suppose one would have to trace them back to their sources to see how MSM the article is. Apparently, you have some magic intuition about it since you could immediately tell it was MSM from just one statement. So you are saying that Assad did not run unopposed in his "elections"? Or what? If there is something you know is wrong in Wikipedia, all you have to do is edit.

My opinion about Syria is nobody knows what is going on there. It is way too complicated and chaotic to say anything meaningful about it. None of the news sources can be trusted. They all have hidden motives. The three most important words in science are "I don't know". That's my position on all of these chaotic situations.

The article you cited about the atrocity seems fairly straightforward. The group claimed responsibility, therefore they are by definition terrorists. I wonder why that's so hard for some people to admit? The group had apparently duped some into thinking they were supporting the ceasefire. Well, we know better now, don't we? Man up and admit your mistake! Gawd, these bureaucrats are stupid.

May-13-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  visayanbraindoctor: <Boomie> Risking sounding like a broken record, please start reading the alternative sources that <twinlar> and I have recommended. Maybe you'll find out for yourself why there are certain groups that are banned in Syrian politics. Here's a clue- perhaps some of the banned groups and politicians are related or part of the same movement that did the massacre in the RT article.

Also please ask yourself, how could such genocidal groups 'dupe' the US government? I believe that the US leadership knows exactly what they are. The US leadership has been supporting such groups beginning I believe in the late 1960s.

Anyway I hope you begin reading an alternative source after reading each MSM article.

May-14-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  twinlark: <visayanbraindoctor: <twinlark> Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff just gotten impeached. What's happening there?>

Colour revolution via "constitutional" coup. This has been happening a long time with the intention of rolling back the "Pink Tide" (cf Venezuela, Argentina, Paraguay and now Brazil with major efforts to destabilise Correa in Bolivia), and fracturing BRICS.

The new "all-white men" cabinet of the interim President is indicative, and they're very likely to quickly re-align the country with the US and impose austerity measures, and reinstating oil exploration rights in the Amazon.

The aim is to undo the last 13 years of work done by the Workers' Party and destroy Roussef and especially Lula (Latin America's Mandela), thereby discrediting this movement for the next generation or two. The people taking over are all under investigation for corruption, but these investigations are likely to disappear now the coup is almost complete. Edouardo Galeano ("Open Veins") would be saddened to see that the progress Brazil has made after 5 centuries of colonialism is being so thoroughly white-anted by this conservative coup.

Neo-colonialism 21st century style employing "hybrid warfare" to break the independent alliance, and to take the B out of BRICS.

May-14-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  twinlark: <Boomie>

My background is very similar to yours, and I still register on the political compass as fully libertarian-left.

The problem is that the Left has become irrelevant in the West, fractured and fractious, with the right wing nationalists stepping into the space abandoned by the Left, which is ironic seeing the extent to which Marx's writings are being re-examined in the wake of the GFC and the new cold war.

In the States, it's ironic that someone like Sanders is seen as a radical lefty, when at best he's a centre-left social democrat at home, but as full blown right wing as anyone else on foreign policy. And he'll throw his support behind Clinton rather than having the gumption to run as an independent candidate.

For the sake of the US, I was hoping Sanders would win the nomination and the presidency, but for the sake of the rest of the world, maybe Trump is the better option, even if his misogyny, racism and random buffoonery would be disastrous for the US. Hillary ("we came, we saw, he died *laugh*") Clinton is good for neither, just more aggressive Bush/Obama policies.

If you guys have the misfortune to have Trump installed as president, then maybe an isolationist US would suit the world just fine. Although Sheldon Adelson (Israel's big man) tossing a hundred mill into his campaign might mean his policy in the Middle East remains orthodox hard line. It's also possible Trump is Adelson's muppet.

Neither <visayanbraindoctor> nor myself argue in this forum. this is a place for constructive information-building discussion rather than rogoffing. We're not giving you the bum's rush, but suggest you apprise yourself of alternative viewpoints and try and understand the world view of Russians, Iranians, Syrians, Chinese and anyone else who isn't Western-oriented.

Maybe they're not the deluded clowns or aggressive fanatics the West thinks they are, and are trying to chart their own destinies free of western corporate interference and domination.

Finally, are you familiar with the historical treatises by the likes of Howard Zinn, Edouardo Galeano, Ronaldo Takaki, Rodolfo F. Acuna and even Oliver Stone dealing with the settlement and exploitation of the Americas?

May-14-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  visayanbraindoctor: <twinlark: fracturing BRICS.>

When I first became aware of BRICS, the sheer audacity of it befuddled me at first. It's almost like a declaration of war on institutional and corporate USA. (Which is different from the American citizen, who typically doesn't know what goes on deep inside the leadership circles.)

I guess such an act is to be expected sooner or later.

We might end up seeing BRICS transformed into RC in the next several years.

May-15-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  twinlark: <We might end up seeing BRICS transformed into RC in the next several years.>

Indeed. The strategy is clearly to pick off the outliers, isolate the RC and destroy or dismember it.

The sheer hypocricy of switching on the missiles defences in Romania and then treating the Nordics to a dinner and speech about Russian aggression would be breathtaking if it weren't so utterly routine.

I'm sad to see the proud Nordics have lost their independence.

May-15-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  visayanbraindoctor: <twinlark> Might interest you. A politically loaded song won in the Eurovision Song Contest 2016 in Stockholm, Sweden.

Note the official logo:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipe...

'Come Together.'

I guess that doesn't apply to Russians.

May-15-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  twinlark: <Visayanbraindoctor>

Also, politically loaded songs are expressly forbidden under the Eurovision rules. Not this time it seems.

May-15-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  visayanbraindoctor: <twinlark>

I've made some corrections and revisions on the sci fi novel I'm writing in <Annie's> page. I would welcome some comments from you (",)

May-17-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  twinlark: <visayanbraindoctor>

Will do.

On another note it seems that yields on Russian bonds have dropped to pre-sanction lows...http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-...

May-18-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  Boomie: The recent Frontline on the evolution of ISIS showed various blunders by the US.

To start, they had the founder of IS, Zarqawi, targeted in Northern Iraq before the invasion. The CIA considered Zarqawi to be a high level target. But Bush and company didn't want to tip off Hussein about the impending invasion. This cost thousands of lives later when IS started its bombing and assassination campaign in Iraq, targeting Shiites.

Next, the invasion itself created the kind of chaos that movements like IS thrive upon. How many lives were lost due to that bonehead invasion?

Finally, the decision to dismiss the entire Iraqi army led to a country full of soldiers in search of a job.

The program may not add anything to your knowledge, but the testimony of various players sheds some light. The CIA agents expressed dismay that their recommendations were being ignored. They knew that Hussein and al-Qaeda were bitter enemies. If he had known Zarqawi had a camp in Iraq, he would have sent his army after him. Yet the NSA contends that Hussein was in league with his enemies? Apparently, the NSA led by Rice was calling the shots. I keep sensing evidence that these guys are not very smart.

May-19-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  twinlark: <Boomie>

Interesting.

<The CIA considered Zarqawi to be a high level target. But Bush and company didn't want to tip off Hussein about the impending invasion.>

Makes you wonder why they didn't send in a delta squad to quietly off the guy one night, and avoid a costly and messy war.

<Next, the invasion itself created the kind of chaos that movements like IS thrive upon. How many lives were lost due to that bonehead invasion?>

If that's the case, why did Powell did provided all that "proof" of Iraqi WMDs? How was this relevant to Zarqawi?

<Finally, the decision to dismiss the entire Iraqi army led to a country full of soldiers in search of a job.>

Not just the Army but the entire Ba'athist bureaucracy. This Ba'athist structure became the Ba'athist insurgency, many of course joining various militant groups including ISIS, al Qaeda, al Nusra and the alphabet soup of competing insurgencies stoked by sectarian divide-and-rule tactics initiated by the occupation forces.

<They knew that Hussein and al-Qaeda were bitter enemies.>

An understatement.

<If he had known Zarqawi had a camp in Iraq, he would have sent his army after him.>

One of the strengths of the Hussein regime was that it was a secular government...the fate of secular governments in the Middle East has been an unfortunate set of events...Libya, Syria. Starts to look like a pattern.

<Yet the NSA contends that Hussein was in league with his enemies? Apparently, the NSA led by Rice was calling the shots. I keep sensing evidence that these guys are not very smart.>

Comes back to the "evidence" provided by Powell at the UN "proving" that Iraq had WMDs. They were smart enough to trump the CIA's intel as well as the intel of every other agency to conform with the desires of Rice, Bush and Cheney, ie to take Iraq and take out Saddam Hussein.

My impression is that the US actually achieved all of its goals...namely the destruction of an independent secular regime, seizure of its resources, destruction of its civil society, destruction of opposition to Israel and US imperial interests, and chaos on the borders of its other enemies Syria and Iran.

Since then Syria has been all but destroyed, as foreseen by almost everyone since 2005, while the official emphasis on the greatest existential dangers to the US has just shifted from ISIS to Russia, China and...Iran.

Look at the trail of bodies left since the fall of the Iron Curtain and especially since 9/11 - Yugoslavia in its various increasingly shrink-wrapped forms, Serbia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Sudan, Libya, Ukraine.

What do all these countries have in common?

I find that a useful filter for understanding events is the geopolitical struggle between the US and independent governments around the world, the biggest of course being the BRICS countries and Iran. Brazil has just fallen, India is virtually ungovernable, Russia and Iran are under sanctions, and South Africa is paralysed politically, years after agreeing to ditch its socialist agenda and retain the infrastructure that served the apartheid regime and its western clients so well.

May-19-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  Boomie: <twinlark>

<If that's the case, why did Powell did provided all that "proof" of Iraqi WMDs? How was this relevant to Zarqawi?>

Frontline interviewed Powell. The CIA had edited the UN speech to conform with what they knew about the situation. None of their edits survived. Zarqawi is mentioned many times in the speech. The White House was trying to connect Hussein with Zarqawi and Zarqawi with al-Qaeda. The CIA not only found no connection between Hussein and Zarqawi, they also knew that al-Qaeda had essentially disowned Zarqawi. Zarqawi wanted to incite a civil war between Sunnis and Shiites. al-Qaeda did not want any part of that.

May-19-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  twinlark: It doesn't make sense, the dots just don't connect.

- Zarqawi was supposed to be in northern Iraq

- he was a senior member of al Qaeda, the organisation created in Pakistan by Pakistan and the US using its asset Osama bin Laden

- bin Laden was blamed for 9/11 on the basis of no real evidence, otherwise the FBI would have had him on their wanted list for the crime

- nevertheless, the US invaded Afghanistan despite offers by the Taliban to hand bin Laden over if the US had any actual evidence, destroying the country and yet still failed to catch bin Laden

- for some reason, al Qaeda/bin Laden through Zarqawi was then linked to Saddam Hussein, again in the absence of evidence, especially given that al Qaeda had disowned Zarqawi and that Saddam and al Qaeda were bitter enemies

- Powell lied to the UN about evidence of WMDs in Iraq, with Blair's connivance with these lies with his own "sexed up" report

How does all this connect with the decision to invade Iraq? It reads as an incoherent set of lies.

If Iraq wasn't responsible for 9/11, had no WMDs as attested by Hans Blick, the Chief of the UN WMD inspections team (Iraq had destroyed all its WMDs in the years since Gulf War I), and had no truck with al Qaeda or Zarqawi, what was the US's actual reason for invading Iraq?

I don't see how Frontline's report actually throws any useful information on what happened. It seems to actually muddy the waters even further.

Why were Afghanistan and Iraq really invaded?

May-19-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  Boomie: <I don't see how Frontline's report actually throws any useful information on what happened. It seems to actually muddy the waters even further.

Why were Afghanistan and Iraq really invaded?>

The report concerned the creation of ISIS. Zarqawi started ISIL which was specific to Iraq. I guess Frontline reviewed the invasion to show its effect on ISIL. The invasion essentially created ISIL. They wouldn't have got anywhere without it. I'm sure Frontline covered the invasion in a different segment.

The invasion of Afghanistan, on the other hand, made sense in the context of 9/11. Many of the hijackers trained there. Zarqawi also had a training base there.

Speaking of state sponsored terrorism, congress passed a bill to allow 9/11 victims to sue the Saudi government. It will probably not get much further as Obama promises a veto, but it does put the Saudis on notice that we are keeping an eye on them.

May-20-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  twinlark: Did Frontline talk about the financing and resources if ISIS?

For it to grow it needed to recruit members and to attract major sponsorship.

May-20-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  Boomie: <twinlark: Did Frontline talk about the financing and resources if ISIS?>

Not so much that I remember. That would be a rather large omission. Perhaps I just forgot the mention of financing. Most of their income seems to be made the old fashioned way, they steal it. The sale of stolen oil has brought in 10s of millions alone.

I just stumbled on a Wiki article specific to ISIL finances: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finan.... It lists various criminal activities and donations from the Saudis and foreign sympathizers. I suspect ISIS finances are similar. Different leader, different country but same folks.

The main Wiki on ISIL is enormous. Almost 800 footnotes...heh. It has a section on resources: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam...

May-20-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  visayanbraindoctor: A comment on <the financing and resources if ISIS?>

Everything I have read and know indicates that the money trail mostly goes back to Sunni Islamist Arab Gulf States.

Some of the trails are hidden, Some are not. My half Pakistani uncle for example tells me that in the 1950s, Pakistan was a lot more secular than it is now. Then the government began to accept Saudi aid. Along with the aid came missionaries preaching Wahabbism in Pakistan's madrasas and mosques. All quite legal and open BTW. Now you see serious quasi Wahabbi movements in Pakistan that have triggered lots of the more recent sectarian violence.

It looks like the same story everywhere AFAIK. Madrasas and mosques controlled by Wahhabi or quasi Wahabbi Islamists are the main recruitment centers for jihadists and their mass base; and they're financed big time by oil money. I don't think this is any secret at all.

We can't expect the US government to seriously try to stop this system of mass base recruitment. US economy is tied to the petrodollar and its Gulf States allies.

May-21-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  Boomie: ->

Here's a link to the Frontline web site featuring the recent ISIS program: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/

I don't pay much attention to TV news. But the PBS programs seem to be the best of the lot. At least they try to do real journalism.

A search of "ISIS" on the Frontline site (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/?...) produces an astonishing 40,000 hits in Frontline pages. They have been all over that story.

Searching "Iraq invasion" (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/?... invasion) produced another bushel of hits.

Jump to page #    (enter # from 1 to 272)
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 272 OF 272 ·  Later Kibitzing>

Take the Premium Membership Tour
NOTE: You need to pick a username and password to post a reply. Getting your account takes less than a minute, totally anonymous, and 100% free--plus, it entitles you to features otherwise unavailable. Pick your username now and join the chessgames community!
If you already have an account, you should login now.
Please observe our posting guidelines:
  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, or duplicating posts.
  3. No personal attacks against other members.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No posting personal information of members.
Blow the Whistle See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform an administrator.


NOTE: Keep all discussion on the topic of this page. This forum is for this specific user and nothing else. If you want to discuss chess in general, or this site, you might try the Kibitzer's Café.
Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.

You are not logged in to chessgames.com.
If you need an account, register now;
it's quick, anonymous, and free!
If you already have an account, click here to sign-in.

View another user profile:
  


home | about | login | logout | F.A.Q. | your profile | preferences | Premium Membership | Kibitzer's Café | Biographer's Bistro | new kibitzing | chessforums | Tournament Index | Player Directory | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | privacy notice | advertising | contact us
Copyright 2001-2016, Chessgames Services LLC
Web design & database development by 20/20 Technologies