Home > Archive > Chess politics > May 2005 > Re: Parr Answers Kingston's Questions





You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread. To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to this thread please [click here]

Author Re: Parr Answers Kingston's Questions
The Historian

2005-05-30, 8:32 pm



Chess One wrote:
quote:

> "Taylor Kingston" <tkingston@chittenden.com> wrote in message
> news:1117463225.682647.69540@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> That is a non-sequiter (sic) Taylor. Research and its presentation are 2 seperate (sic)
> items, with no necessary causal link.


This whole line of argument is a non sequitur, Philth.
quote:

> But its interesting that you raise the subject right now - didn't you cite
> Averbakh verbatim,


People usually do that in interviews, Philth.

without knowing if he was, or was not a member of the
quote:

> KGB, or a proxy agent, or to whom he was requitred (sic) to report?


When you accused Taylor Kingston and Chess Cafe of "sole-sourcing the
KGB", you didn't know anything about Averbakh. Face it, Your I-ness,
this is the 1001st time you've had to try to weasel out of one of your
own posts.

Is there
quote:

> something you would like to establish in any of these shades?
>
> Maybe you have some level of understanding of what any minor soviet-era
> oligarch would be required to report, and to whom?
>
>
> Innes's question.


No, a claim. You stated Averbakh was KGB. Alburt, who has connections
in the former Soviet chess community that perhaps even exceed those of
Philip Keith Innes, "knew of nothing to support Innes' claim."
quote:

>Thanks for the misrepresentation Taylor.
>
> Go ahead, snip my whole day, Phil Innes


Would that someone would snip your Internet connection....

Copyright 2003 - 2009 gamesreviews.net Software forum  PC Hardware reviews