Cross posted from RenounceUScitizenship
Warning! The following video contains language that may offend some of you. To articulate the obvious:
1. The language in the video irrelevant to the purpose and message of the post.
2. If I need to say this: obviously I do NOT share Mr. Fischer’s bigoted views.
To be forewarned is to be forearmed!
“None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.”
– Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
“The notion of “dual loyalties” may seem old-fashioned to some – a throwback to the days of Cold War spy-sniffing. But the concept is hardly obsolete, for the same reason that monogamy isn’t obsolete (for most of us, anyway): No one can serve two masters at once.”
The above interview of Bobby Fischer after his release from prison in Japan contains some interesting comments about U.S. citizenship. Why did the U.S. government not intervene on behalf of U.S. citizen Bobby Fischer? Where was the protection of the U.S. government?
What is citizenship? A voluntary association or is it a condition of servitude?
If citizenship is a “voluntary” association it implies that one is free to leave the “association”. A voluntary association can be terminated. One just leaves the association. One simply renounces citizenship. One simply ceases to reside in the country. If one leaves, then that country does not attempt to apply its laws in an extraterritorial manner.
If citizenship is a condition of servitude then the situation is different. The country assumes a “property right” in the citizen. Ownership of the citizen implies that the country:
– Can tax the citizen regardless of where the citizen resides
– Can conscript the citizen into military service; and most interestingly
– Can control the behavior of the citizen outside the country
U.S. citizenship bears some of the “earmarks” of a condition of servitude. The U.S. assumes a property right in its citizens and extracts a payment from the citizen to end the ownership. This is remarkably similar to some African American slaves, buying their freedom from their masters. The historical practice is documented as follows:
“A rare option was “self-purchase” (the term itself revealing the base illogic of slavery). In 1839 almost half (42%) of the free blacks in Cincinnati, Ohio, had bought their freedom and were striving to create new lives while searching for and purchasing their own relatives.”
The U.S. system of citizenship-based taxation is unique in the world. In the same way that the slaves could sometimes buy their freedom, some U.S. citizens are required to pay an Exit Tax to receive their freedom. Further examples of the United States treating its citizens as property are:
The U.S. subjected its citizens to military service.
The U.S. by imposing the death penalty assumes the right to end the life of a citizen.
The U.S. through laws with extraterritorial application assume the right to control the conduct of its citizens outside the United States. Examples include: taxing citizens who live outside the United States; prohibiting U.S. citizens from traveling from Canada to Cuba; requiring citizens who live outside the United States to file FBARs and comply with aspects of FATCA; making it unlawful for U.S. citizens to do what is legal for those who are not U.S. citizens. These are examples of treating the citizen as the property of the government.
The Use of The Citizen as an Instrument of Foreign Policy
The United States uses its citizens as instruments of U.S. foreign policy without their will. It does so by criminalizing their conduct outside the United States. This is antithetical to the “dignity of the individual” (recognized in a number of International Human Rights documents).
Introducing Bobby Fischer – Fischer Spaasky One – Iceland 1972
The case of Bobby Fischer provides an interesting example of how the United States used its “ownership of a U.S. citizen” to further foreign policy objectives.
Those of us “of a certain age” remember world chess champion Bobby Fischer. (Those who don’t remember him would do well to learn about him.) Bobby Fischer was a U.S. born citizen who played Boris Spassky and the Soviet Chess machine for the world chess championship. The match took place in Iceland in the summer of 1972. It captivated the world for two reasons:
1. Chess is a hugely popular game throughout the world.
2. The match took place during the height of the cold war. It was widely seen as a contest between the U.S. and Soviet systems. Make no mistake about it, much of fascination was based on the fact that Bobby Fischer was a U.S. citizen who was playing the Soviet Union ( represented by Boris Spassky).
The U.S. government was deeply interested in the Fischer Spassky match and what it represented. Fischer was considered to be an extension of the United States.
In the months leading up to the World Chess Championship, Fischer indicated that he would NOT participate. Fischer was absent for the opening game. (He was still in New York.) U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger intervened and encouraged Fischer to go to Iceland and play for the United States. Kissinger called Fischer with the intention of telling him that:
I think if I call him I should just call him and tell him from a foreign policy point of view I hope the hell he gets over there.
Although the influence of Kissinger is unclear, Fischer did attend and defeated Boris Spassky. By so doing he also defeated the Soviet chess machine to become champion of the world. Fischer’s victory was an amazing achievement. This was because, although the Soviet Government supported Mr. Spassky, the U.S. government provided no support for Fischer.
The lack of support notwithstanding, the U.S. government was quick to trumpet Fischer’s victory as a U.S. victory over communism and the Soviet empire. To quote one commentator:
Imagine the Psychological pressure he would have to face taking on the Soviets. USA should FOREVER thank Bobby Fischer for having trounced the Soviets , all alone. Bobby might have done it in his own interest. It just happened that his mother moved to USA, which proved to be USA’s gain.
After having won the world championship Fischer went into seclusion. He was not heard from again until 1992.
Fischer Spaasky – Round Two – Yugoslavia 1992
In 1992 a Yugoslav businessman arranged for a Fischer Spassky rematch in Belgrade, Serbia. What happened next is described in Wikipedia as follows:
“The U.S. Department of the Treasury had warned Fischer beforehand that his participation was illegal as it violated President George H. W. Bush‘s Executive Order 12810 that implemented United Nations Security Council Resolution 757 sanctions against engaging in economic activities in Yugoslavia.[265] In response, Fischer called a conference and, in front of the international press, literally spat on the U.S. order forbidding him to play, announcing “This is my reply”. Following the match, the Department obtained an arrest warrant against him. Fischer remained wanted by the United States government for the rest of his life and never returned to America.”
Fischer’s crime was accepting payment for playing chess in Serbia contrary to U.S. law.
The U.S. encouraged Fischer to play chess in Iceland, in 1972 when it was perceived to be in the interests of the U.S. government (remember the Kissinger intervention).
The U.S. prohibited Fischer from playing chess in Serbia, in 1992, when it was against its interests. The U.S. criminalized Fischer’s playing chess in Serbia.
The U.S. government took the position, that because Fischer was a U.S. citizen, and therefore the property of the United States, that it could control his conduct outside of the United States.
By prohibiting him from playing, the U.S. was using Fischer as an instrument of U.S. foreign policy. Fischer did play. He won the rematch with Spassky. Fortunately he received a prize of approximately 3.5 million dollars. That was the good news. The bad news was that by playing he had upset the United States. He was now a fugitive from U.S. justice. As a result he could not return to the U.S.
Fischer Arrested in Japan
Life continued well until 2004. In July of 2004 Fischer was arrested trying to board a plane in Tokyo. Under what many believed was pressure from the U.S. government, Fischer was arrested and held in a Japanese jail for six months. Where is the U.S. embassy when you need it?
These events were described as follows:
“The Status Report by Einar S. Einarsson of the Icelandic RJF Committee complains that Fischer has been held for almost six months in jail, and that a month has now passed since he was granted a residence visa in Iceland. Still no tangible progress has been made, the US Embassy in Reykjavik has still not given any formal answers on the matter. The Japanese Authorities, too, are buckling under pressure from the US. When Fischer’s assistant asked how long they intended to hold him, a high-ranking official replied, “We can keep him as long as we like. We can eat him if we choose to.” Bobby is taking this harsh and hostile treatment admirably well, but he is getting physically exhausted by this very lengthy proceeding over a passport. He suffers from frequent headaches and dizziness.
“Six months in a Japanese prison over a passport” is an article by Guðmundur G. Thórarinsson, a former Icelandic Parliamentarian, former president of the Icelandic Chess Federation and chief organizer of the Match of the Century between Bobby Fischer and Boris Spassky in 1972. He describes Fischer’s situation: the detainee is allowed to go outdoors for 45 minutes a day, five days a week. He suffers from chronic and worsening headaches and dizzy spells. “For twelve years, this lonely genius has been exiled from his homeland. He has sat in jail for six months because his passport is invalid.” Thórarinsson reminds us that Fischer’s crime was that he played chess in Yugoslavia in violation of the economic sanctions then in force. In his autobiography Bill Clinton says that the Americans passed this regulation knowing that numerous parties were selling weapons to the Balkan nations, but that no charges were filed in those cases because of the great shortage of weapons in the region. Neither were artists indicted when they worked there. Thórarinsson writes: “The only person in the world to have been indicted for a violation of this regulation – a regulation that has long since ceased to be in force, and a violation committed in a country that no longer exists – is Robert James Fischer. This case is an example of a barbarous violation of human rights.“
Fischer’s Release – A Gift From Iceland – Iceland Citizenship
Fischer was released because he had been granted citizenship in Iceland. The saga is described as follows:
Saemi realized he had to change his strategy. He returned home and with the backing of the Icelandic Chess Federation, Saemi went straight to the top and appealed to Iceland’s Prime Minister – if Fischer was granted Icelandic citizenship then he would no longer be bound by American law and Japan would have to free him.
But Saemi had a tough fight on his hands. The Icelandic government was not known for rocking the boat. Keeping a “good relationship” with the USA was high on their agenda and not only that but the Icelandic PM was also a friend of President George Bush. Saemi delivered his argument anyway – why should Fischer be persecuted just for playing a game of chess? The matter was put to the vote at the Icelandic parliament where they won by a unanimous vote. The Prime Minister said that Fischer’s citizenship had been granted for humanitarian reasons and because Saemi was a “man of honor”. Against all odds, Saemi had done the seemingly impossible. He had freed his friend.
As soon as the documents were stamped, the authorities in Tokyo had to release Fischer. He was taken to the airport where the world’s press eagerly awaited him. But Fischer’s psychopathic tendencies wouldn’t let him just bask in his freedom. Instead, he used the opportunity to deliver a bitter tirade against the President of the U.S. and the PM of Japan, saying they should be hanged for their crimes.”
During his detention Fischer did attempt to renounce his U.S. citizenship. It is unclear whether he was successful.
Bobby Fischer lived the rest of his life in Iceland. He died in Iceland in 2008 at the age of 64. Who knows whether his detention in Japan contributed to his relatively early death.
U.S. Citizenship and the life of Bobby Fischer
U.S. Citizens As Property Of The U.S. Government
Clearly Fischer’s troubles were the result of the U.S. assuming jurisdiction over him while he was in Serbia. The U.S. believed that it had the right to control his behavior while he was outside the United States. Had Fischer not been considered under the direct jurisdiction of the U.S. government, he never would have landed in jail.
Imagine – going to jail for accepting money for playing chess in Serbia.
Another interesting example of the “citizen as government property” comes from an interview with Fischer. Here is an excerpt:
The second interview, which is just over an hour long, was recorded on Aug 20, 2004 at 20:40h Japanese time. It was conducted by GM Eugene Torre, an old friend of Fischer, Boy Pobre, chairman of the Philippine Chess Aficionados and Masters Association, the studio anchor and other guests.
Torre, Anchor: How are you, Bobby?
Bobby Fischer: Fine. I got some good news today. The US says they are willing to come to the detention center so I can renounce my citizenship, take the official oath. That is a good sign. Hopefully this will satisfy the US and they will tell the Japanese to let me out of jail. Then I can try to rebuild my legal status and get papers and passport from some other country.
Boy Pobre: A few days ago we had a car caravan with signs saying “Free Bobby Fischer” and we wrote a letter to the governments of the United States and Japan, asking them to free Bobby Fischer and allow him to seek asylum in a country of his choice. [Reads:] “His continued detention and deportation would be a violation of his basic human rights, as he has not committed any crime. Bobby Fischer is the greatest chess player of all time. He is an international treasure and no nation can own him alone.” But the embassies of both countries refused to accept the letter. In fact we were harassed by guards and military personnel at the US Embassy. We are also urging our own government to take action and invite you to stay in the Philippines, as an honoured future citizen.
Fisher: Thank you. You know, when I was over in Hungary, in the late nineties, the US government made an announcement saying that all American citizens in Hungary and Budapest could not go to a certain hotel in Budapest to eat or spend any money, because this hotel is owned by the Libyan government. “If you go there we are going to find out about it, and we are going to prosecute you and put you into prison.” Can you imagine telling Americans in Budapest they cannot eat in a certain restaurant?
Fischer attempts to renounce U.S. citizenship – to end his servitude
While he was in custody Fischer attempted to renounce his U.S. citizenship.
In the following we bring you two letters handwritten by Fischer and addressed to the US consular authorities in Tokyo. In it the former world champion attempts to renounce his US citizenship.
August 6, 2004 From: Robert James Fischer at the Narita Airport Immigration lockup. To: “Peter” at the Tokyo U.S. Embassy.
Dear “Peter” (you won’t tell me what your last name is) I called you yesterday at the U.S. Embassy in Tokyo at about 10:00 am and we discussed some of the various vicious crimes the U.S. and the Japanese governments have committed against me working in collusion and in conspiracy since at least July 13, 2004. I say “at least” because obviously the conspiracy to commit those crimes had to begin some time before July 13, 2004. I also told you that I wished to renounce my U.S. citizenship on that very day August 5, 2004. I asked that either you or someone else from the U.S. Embassy in Tokyo come over to the Narita International Airport Detention center lockup immediately so I could officially renounce my U.S. citizenship on that very day, yesterday August 5, 2004. You made one excuse after another as to why neither you nor anyone else from the Embassy could come over to do it. Such as: you had no time that day, and no one else at the Embassy had time that day, you didn’t know the law and you’d have to study it first, also you would have to check with Washington D.C. first. I said could you or someone else from the Embassy come over tomorrow (i.e. today) to do it. You said you didn’t know and you couldn’t say. Judging by your jittery, jumpy nervous answers to my demand to officially renounce my U.S. citizenship I realized I’d hit a nerve. Apparently my renouncing my U.S. citizenship does not fit in too conveniently with the U.S.-Japanese plot to illegally deport me to my “home” country the U.S.A. and illegally try, convict, imprison, torture and murder me there. At about 9:30 am this morning I will request my kidnappers here to place a call with the U.S. Embassy in Tokyo for about 10:00 am. I will again demand that either you or someone else from the Embassy come over here so that I can officially renounce my U.S. citizenship today. I’m quite sure that in violation of my rights you will not. (If I’m wrong so much the better.) But assuming that you won’t I will now do the job myself. Since you are refusing to cooperate as the U.S. law commands you to I believe this renunciation has full validity under the law. That is if one can even speak seriously about “law” in a lawless country like the U.S.A. Here goes: I am Robert James Fischer. I am a U.S. citizen. I was born on March 9, 1943 in Chicago, Ill. U.S.A. My U.S. passport no. is or was Z7792702. It was issued at the U.S. Embassy in Bern, Switzerland. The issue date is January 24, 1997 and the expiry date is January 23, 2007. I Robert James Fischer do hereby irrevocably and permanently renounce my U.S. citizenship and all the supposed rights and privileges of United States citizenship. I will do my very best to get this letter hand delivered to you at the Tokyo U.S. Embassy today. Free at last, free at last, thank God almighty I am free at last.
Sincerely,
Robert James Fischer
August 10, 2004 From: Robert James Fischer at the Narita Airport Immigration lockup. To: “Peter at the Tokyo U.S. Embassy
Dear “Peter” (you wont tell me what your last name is) I just spoke with you again on the phone about you or someone else from the U.S. Embassy in Tokyo coming out here this morning so that I can officially renounce my U.S. citizenship in person before a U.S. consular or diplomatic officer and you flatly refused. You also said nobody else from the Embassy could come today to do it. I asked you if you had received my letter to you of August 6, 2004 and you said you had. I told you that in my opinion the letter was legally valid and that I was no longer an American citizen. I asked you if you agreed and you refused to answer. You said if I had any request to make to the U.S. Embassy in Tokyo I should communicate it in writing by letter and then hung up. I have demanded that you or someone else from the U.S. Embassy in Tokyo come out here every working day since Aug. 5, 2004 until today August 10, 2004 so that I could renounce my U.S. citizenship before a U.S. consular or diplomatic officer. I spoke with you August 5, 2004, August 6 2004, and today August 10, 2004. I also called the U.S. Embassy in Tokyo yesterday August 9, 2004 to renounce my U.S. citizenship here in front of a U.S. consular or diplomatic officer but the Embassy secretary refused to put me through to you or anyone else at the Embassy and she hung up on me about 4 or 5 times. However she did admit that you were there at the Embassy at that time but that you were “unavailable” to talk to me. She also admitted that she believed that you had received my letter to you of August 6, 2004. Well, “Peter” (you won’t tell me what your last name is) that’s all by way of background. So now here is my demand to you and the U.S. Embassy in Tokyo, Japan. I demand that you immediately send a U.S. consular or diplomatic officer over to me at the Narita Airport immigration detention center lockup so that I can sign an oath of renunciation of my U.S. citizenship in front of him or her today. I’m told by my kidnappers here that they’re moving me to another prison today. They’re moving me to the Ushiko Immigration detention center lockup in Ibaragi prefecture. I’ll be leaving here at about 1.00 p.m and arriving at the Ushiko Immigration detention center lockup a few hours later. So if it’s too late to take the oath of renunciation here at Narita today we can do it tonight or tomorrow morning in Ushiko. I will endeavour to get this letter hand delivered over to you at your Embassy today. No more delaying games and royal runaround “Peter.” I demand my right to officially renounce my U.S. citizenship in front of a U.S. consular or diplomatic officer NOW. It’s not like the old days “Peter” all this is going to the Internet and the whole world is watching your chicanery and criminality. You’ve already physically destroyed my perfectly valid U.S. passport No. Z7792702 by punching holes through it. This illegal act was meant to criminalize me but in reality it only criminalized you and the U.S. government! O.K. “Peter” (you won’t tell me what your last name is) get off the stick and get yourself or someone else from the U.S. Embassy in Tokyo over here or to Ushiko so we can officially do the renunciation bit.
Sincerely
Robert James Fischer
Bobby Fischer Renounce In Peace and Rest In Peace
U.S. citizen Bobby Fischer was treated by the U.S. government as the property of the U.S. government.
His U.S. citizenship was used to the advantage of the U.S. government in:
– 1972 when he was trumpeted as the U.S. citizen who beat the Soviet chess machine
– 1992 when the fact of his U.S. citizenship was used by the U.S. government to try to prevent from playing chess in Serbia.
It is clear that U.S. citizenship was not a benefit to Fischer and in fact was the source of many of his difficulties. The greatest tragedy of his life was that he was born as a U.S. citizen. Bobby Fischer lived at least the last 16 years of his life outside the United States. Do you think that Bobby Fischer ever filed a U.S. tax return? Do you think that Bobby Fischer ever filed an FBAR?
Rest in peace Bobby Fischer!
As a tribute to Bobby Fischer I include the following four documentary videos about the 1972 World Championship match.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9gO5Cro1qUE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7c-zY60u52E
@Steven: I agree, let’s get back on topic. If you have any influence with IRS, could you ask them to stop calling law-abiding tax-paying citizens and residents of other countries who had the misfortune to be born in the US “tax evaders” or “tax cheats.”
Thanks.
“There is a fine line between censorship and good taste and moral responsibility.”
– Steven Spielberg
Being called a Tax Cheat in the media is honestly one of the things that irritates me about this whole situation! Petty, yes, but still true.
@ Steve I guess your years as a litigator have made you forget the meaning of the logical fallacy called “ad hominem”. I don’t care if Bobby Fischer stuck q-tips up his butt in the video. He was still treated unjustly by the United States and Japanese governments.
@Everyone
I think the situation with Bobby Fischer was tragic but I as I said before I think the blame has to go around to all parties. Fischer was clearly mentally disturbed for many years. I don’t know the details on the specific legality of traveling to Yugoslavia back in 1992 from either an American or Canadian or any other country’s legal perspective. Perhaps something legally could have been worked among all parties involved(If Fischer were to have been charged with a crime its is not at clear he would be at competent to stand trial). Most countries as part of the United Nations are supposed to implement sanctions on extraterritorial basis to all of their citizens. I am not sure the issue involved were UN Sanctions or not. I would say I DO believe in that UN Sanction/Actions should be taken in some circumstances and that the UN member states do need to in some sense enforce them.
Was he held for 6 months in Japan because, years before, he played chess in a country where the US did not want him to play?
@Mr. Mopsick – there is a very good reason I’m calling this the Diaspora Tax War of 2012. I think this is going to get very ugly before it’s over. In general the US diaspora is composed of pretty reasonable folks who have been quite genteel and careful about expressing their views. This gentility is evidently not terribly effective because we don’t seem to be able to get a hearing from anyone. Not even our own family members in some cases. Having been clearly informed that we are the eggs to be broken in the making of this omelet some of us are getting rather riled up. The belligerent and obnoxious comments about us being “tax evaders” and “cheats” are adding insult to injury. For the moment people are for the most part remaining polite because there is still some hope that this can all be mitigated or resolved in some way. If that hope is lost, I think you will start seeing active and very loud hostility from Americans abroad who think they have nothing more to lose. There are certainly a lot of people in many countries around the world that do not have much love for the US – I’m sure they would be delighted to have this unpleasantness spattered on the front page of their national newspapers. If nothing else it will keep their own people from thinking about immigrating to America. That’s my take on it. I hope it doesn’t come to that but I honestly think that I’m looking at a shipwreck headed straight for a coastline the way things are going right now.
@Victoria
“There are certainly a lot of people in many countries around the world that do not have much love for the US – I’m sure they would be delighted to have this unpleasantness spattered on the front page of their national newspapers.”
Well, these problems are already almost a weekly feature on the Globe and Mail in Canada 🙂
I have to say that I found your comment about cloud computing really interesting. I work for an EU institution and just got out of a meeting – The EU wants employees to stop using all Google services, especially translation and document sharing services, due to security concerns with regards to US government access. They are going to development internal tools for us to use to ween us off of Google services as a result.
@Don – Good point. I’m still waiting though for Al Jazeera or Al Jazeera sur Seine (Le Monde) to pick up the story. For the moment I’ve not tried to get it into the French papers – it just feels like a bridge too far for me. Even now. It just feels too hostile and I don’t think I’d feel good about being responsible for that. That could change however. 🙂
The cloud computing thing is fascinating. It is potentially a huge market for US IT but because of the Patriot act there are questions about security which are being exploited by other countries’ IT industries. EU countries in particular seem to be very aggressive right now about contrasting EU privacy laws against US law and telling clients how terribly dangerous it would be to park their data with a US company. US IT got scared and angry enough about it to call for the Obama administration to get in there and do something. Not sure that anything short of repealing the Patriot Act will do any good. I wrote about it here at the Flophouse
http://thefranco-americanflophouse.blogspot.com/2012/01/globalization-cloud-services-and-us.html
if you’re interested. There are links to some good articles about it in my post.
@Victoria
Well, this stuff is all over Iran’s “PressTV”, for what that’s worth.
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/223680.html
I can’t think of any specific links on the top of head at the moment, but FATCA has been all the German press since German banks are shedding US clients now. It is only possible for US citizens to have simple current and savings accounts in Germany, and that is subject to review of the final FATCA proposals. I haven’t seen much in the Italian or Belgian press, but the Swiss press (unsurprisingly) has been probably the most vocal after Canada. Word is spreading. I would love to get an article into the UK Guardian, because that has a huge reader base, especially in the US.
Oh and I totally agree with your EU institution. If I were working for any EU entity in the public or private sector I would give exactly the same advice. Get off Google. Stay away from any datacenter in the US and perhaps even datacenters in other countries run by US companies. That would be my professional opinion shorn of all national sentiment.
And I just followed the link you posted. Well coat me with brown sugar and cook me up for breakfast – word *is* getting out. Thanks, Don. Made my day.
@Victoria and Don – I have already moved my email accounts to Portugal. Why? Because the mail server is pretty good and I don’t have to worry about getting caught up in some US marketing program. I’m not really too concerned about security or the “patriot act” because I’m not doing anything that’s wrong.
The other day I was making a post on a website (I think the Washington Post), and I got the message “You are located outside of the US. Your comments will be stored in America”. Kind of scary though– it was almost like an electronic Miranda Rights.
It’s like they say in the renunciation interview, the US can get you anywhere in the world. After the Kim Dotcom episode, I believe them. I saw a photo yesterday that Kim’s crime is punishable with 50 years in jail, but a murderer will only get 20. US laws for some offences are really lopsided… I just want to go my way, and the US can go its way.
@Victoria, I hope you have thought about getting French citizenship. I really think most large banks in 2013 are going to tell people like us to take a hike. Almost all of the banks in my city have a US presence and will likely have to comply with this. At least to me, the FATCA gives people like me no other option…
@Steven Mopsick
I am going to have to side with Steven Mopsick on this one.
Mr. Fichers problems with the US government, albeit harsh and unfair, is indeed a sad state of the way the US Government treats is citizens.
However………
It is unfortunate that his anti-semetic views have soured the thrust of his fight …at least for me anyway.
I realize that you can classify these a two separate issues…or even his experience led him down this dark path.
Whatever makes you sleep at night.
I think we at the IBS can find other individuals who have been done wrong with the US government that do not write personal letters to Bin Laden.
Ficher is not someone I want to stand at the top of the hill with.
Hope I didn’t offend anybody here…just my opinion.
@Mach7 Some of us have found the State Department unhelpful in our attempts to renounce or relinquish our citizenship. So I ask, if we allow injustice to happen to someone whose views whom we hate, where do we draw the line? Justice is blind. Let’s focus on whether Fischer was wrongfully or rightfully detained in Japan, and on whether the United States was right to ignore his pleas to renounce his citizenship. Otherwise, the rest of us can be tainted as bigots or tax cheats and no one will come to defend us either. A bigot deserves justice just the same as the most politically correct creature that walks the planet.
A rich person deserves justice, a poor person deserves justice. Who doesn’t deserve justice?
The State Department has arrogantly portrayed some our people as US citizens who haven’t been citizens for decades. It has denied some our people the right to relinquish. Fischer’s story is pertinent. Let’s not be side tracked by ad hominem arguments. Steven knows exactly what he is doing. That’s why he hasn’t come back with a counter point to my charge that it is ad hominem. That works in a court of law because all you have to do is accuse a witness with some crime or some character defect then suddenly his testimony carries less weight. But I don’t see why such ad hominem arguments should apply in this case. The United States doesn’t get off the hook so easily. Bobby Fischer was detestable. But he was a human being who had rights, just as the rest of us. When we fail to defend the rights of those we hate, then look out, our rights will soon wither away as well.
Hi Petros: to be clear, please re-read my prior posts. I am not making an ad hominem argument against “Bobby”; I am just saying that the IBS’s message is diluted when you choose to put up an idiot as your poster child! 🙂
No, the ad hominem (guilt by association) is against the Isaac Brock Society. You suggest that we have discredited ourselves by decrying United States treatment of citizens as slaves of the state and pointing to the example of how the United States treated Bobby Fischer.
Now you have added a straw man argument to your ad hominem attack, by suggesting that we are making him our poster child. Nice try.
Ok, so I gave in and watched the Fischer video. I think that he clearly had mental health problems, which were probably made worse by living his life on the run for over a decade. Not just his off the wall comments, but even the way that he moves and his mannerisms suggest real issues.
I find the US attempt to persecute him for playing a chess match to be ridiculous, regardless of whether or not he violated UN sanctions. Were they going to throw him in prison for that? What a waste of prison resources. They should have just fined him and been done with it.
Kim Dotcom is another example of ridiculous overreach of the US justice system – He could be jailed for 50 years, whilst many murderers and rapists can normally expect only a 20 year prison sentence. Its nonsense like this that is the reason that the US has over 2 MILLION people in prison. Another reason as well for their out of control deficit no doubt.
@Petros
I think Steven’s point is a good one. Nobody is trying to excuse any injustice. We want good PR, and PR is at least as much about perception as about reality. The World Wide Fund for Nature showcases pandas and snow leopards, and not giant earthworms, for a reason.
Also on PR, I think Isaac Brock Soc probably wants to avoid becoming associated with the acronym IBS. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irritable_bowel_syndrome for why!
@Watcher
Great find :)! “IBS” sounds like a bank to me or something. Think UBS, RBS (Royal Bank of Scotland)…
Correction!
A Google search for IBS results in Irritable Bowel Syndrome in second place for me. The first hit? “International Balloon Service” 😛
@ Watcher Steve’s point is an example of the anti-intellectual low-level rhetoric coming out of the United States. He is a lawyer, and in the adversarial court system there is apparently no rule against ad hominem and straw man arguments.
I never use IBS and do not encourage anyone else to use acronyms. Acronyms are the language of Mordor (hence, Steve came up with it).
When it comes to find a proper symbol of our movement, we chose Isaac Brock, not Bobby Fischer–Do you see Fischer’s picture at the top of blog dying for his anti-Semitism? No. Whose picture is there? Isaac Brock. Fischer is just a story. Does Wikipedia have a bad reputation because it has a Bobby Fischer entry? The New York Times covered the Bobby Fischer story? Are they tainted by that story? Now, one of our writers has written a great post covering the Bobby Fischer story from our point of view. Why is Fischer now the poster child of the Isaac Brock Society? Because Steven says so? I don’t think so.
I am amazed that this post has generated such controversy.
Steven was the first to register his displeasure with:
“Am I the only one who is offended by holding up the mad rantings of “Bobby” Fischer as authority for anything at all? Fischer didn’t even bother to use “code words” to puke out his message of hate. With all due respect, the IBS should use a bit more care in the way it frames the issues. And with a video no less!”
Now my initial read of this that he objected to the video because of Fischer’s rant (offensive to many). In subsequent comments he has tried to clarify what he meant.
After having read all these comments (and recovering from the shock of all this), I have the following thoughts.
The post was not about Fischer. But, Fischer is an exceptional example of what the post was about. Everybody agrees that it is okay to write about Fischer. The objection seems to be that it is NOT okay to show him in a video. What is the reason for this?
Steven (in a rather emotive description of Fischer) refers to him as a “Nut Bar”. Well maybe he is. But, that doesn’t change the fact that he was very poorly treated by the U.S. government. How could the U.S. government get away with this? Why did nobody object? I suspect the answer is because: Fischer is a “nut bar” and therefore he can be poorly treated. Well if that’s the answer (and I cannot say with certainty that it is) then the injustice has been compounded. Rather than one injustice there are now two injustices.
1. The law itself was unjust; and
2. He was prosecuted because he was a “nut bar”.
This doubles the injustice and provides good reason for using Fischer as an example.
Steven when you were admitted to the Bar you took an oath to uphold the constitution. The constitution is premised on freedom and includes provisions that guarantee equal protection, etc. A constitutional right is necessary to protect people from the conduct of governments.
The whole reason for equal protection is to prevent the government from going after people it just does not like (you know the “nut bars”). Therefore, as a lawyer, I would have thought that you would have been concerned about the conduct of the government.
The Consitution of the United States is premised on freedom (the thing that the Patriot Act has tried to take from us).
But freedom is not free!
The price of freedom is that there will be lots of people around who you don’t like.
I always liked the bumper sticker:
If you value your freedom thank a vet”.
How about this:
If you value your freedom be happy there are people you don’t like. They are living breathing (and possibly offensive) examples of the proof that you have freedom too.
Since this whole discussion started with a video, I think I will offer another video. It’s Ronald Reagan. I bet there are people who don’t like him. But, here goes …
@ renounce Thanks for these great comments.
Steven worked 30 years in the IRS. He has stated that once the IRS brands you as a tax protestor (i.e., a nutcase), you get much worse treatment. I.e., what you are describing seems to be an M.O.
@Steven: To move away from Bobby Fischer, here are some quotes by several American leaders about Canada. You can see from these how the relationship between the two nations has evolved over time.
Today’s IRS has completely lost the “nine parts good will and common sense” Harry Truman spoke about. It seems IRS still harbors the attitude of John Adams (“Canada must be ours. Quebec must be taken.”) and Thomas Jefferson (“The acquisition of Canada this year, as far as the neighborhood of Quebec will be a mere matter of marching.”
Just as Adams and Jefferson failed in those attempts, so too will IRS fail in its attempts to pillage its former citizens and ex pats who are leading responsible lives in sovereign countries around the world.
Here are the quotes:
1. John Adams
The Unanimous Voice of the Continent is “Canada must be ours; Quebec must be taken.”
~1776. While serving as a delegate to the Continental Congress.
2. Thomas Jefferson
The acquisition of Canada this year, as far as the neighborhood of Quebec, will be a mere matter of marching, and will give us experience for the attack of Halifax the next, and the final expulsion of England from the American continent.
~1812. In a letter to Colonel William Duane.
3. Franklin Roosevelt
…when I have been in Canada, I have never heard a Canadian refer to an American as a “foreigner.” He is just an “American.” And, in the same way, in the United States, Canadians are not “foreigners,” they are “Canadians.” That simple little distinction illustrates to me better than anything else the relationship between our two countries.
~1936. During a visit to Quebec City.
4. Harry S. Truman
Canadian-American relations for many years did not develop spontaneously. The example of accord provided by our two countries did not come about merely through the happy circumstance of geography. It is compounded of one part proximity and nine parts good will and common sense.
~1947. Address to Canadian Parliament.
5. Dwight Eisenhower
Our forms of government – though both cast in the democratic pattern – are greatly different. Indeed, sometimes it appears that many of our misunderstandings spring from an imperfect knowledge on the part of both of us of the dissimilarities in our forms of government.
~1958. Address to Canadian Parliament.
6. John F. Kennedy
Geography has made us neighbors. History has made us friends. Economics has made us partners. And necessity has made us allies. Those whom nature hath so joined together, let no man put asunder. What unites us is far greater than what divides us.
~1961. Address to Canadian Parliament.
7. Ronald Reagan
We are happy to be your neighbor. We want to remain your friend. We are determined to be your partner and we are intent on working closely with you in a spirit of co-operation.
~1981. Address to Canadian Parliament.
8. Bill Clinton
Canada has shown the world how to balance freedom with compassion and tradition with innovation, in your efforts to provide health care to all your citizens, to treat your senior citizens with the dignity and respect they deserve, to take on tough issues like the move afoot to outlaw automatic weapons designed for killing and not for hunting….
~1995. Address to Canadian House of Commons.
9. George W. Bush
I view the relationship with Canada as a vital relationship for the United States. The relationship, of course, is defined government-to-government. It’s also defined people-to-people, and there’s a lot of people in my country who respect Canada and have great relations with Canadians, and we intend to keep it that way.
~2006. In Cancun, Mexico after meeting with Stephen Harper.
@renounce and @Petros: now THIS is really getting funny, you must admit. (1) I did not invent the accronym “IBS”; there are references to the Isaac Brock Society elsewhere on the internet as “IBS.”
(2) back to “Bobby” and the ad hominem vs. the “this-is-really-getting-riduculous” issue, here are some observations: I looked again at the 8 minute video you posted originally. For the first 54 seconds there is meaningless chatter about having a serious interview before they ate. Then from the 54 second marker to about the 2 minutes marker there is “Bobby” spouting off about his analysis of whether “the Jews will leave him alone.” After that from 2:22 when “Bobby asks if an Icelander can have dual citizenship” we get “Bobby’s” pearls of wisdom about how dangerous it is to check into a hotel as an American today because someone might tell some Muslims he is there and that could be dangerous. For the whole last four minutes of the eight minute video we get, “Bobby” talks about how he hates chess, about the chess game he invented and his comparison of his game to some other guy’s invented chess game.
That’s your pitch against American hegemony?
I looked at one of the other videos you posted after the original 8 minute post and got as far as “Bobby” giving his analyis of Frank Sinatra’s problems with a subpoena from the State of New Jersey but I quit listening after I learned from “Bobby” that all of Frank’s problems with the press stopped when “he married a Jewish woman,” [Barbara Marx].
Boys: what am I missing here?
30 Year IRS Vet