Bobby Fischer

Robert James Fischer, the highly controversial International Grandmaster of Chess who defeated Boris Spassky in 1972 to become World Chess Champion only to default the title three years later, died today at the age of 64.

Fischer although brilliant on the chessboard left much to be desired as a person in this way he was very similar to Grandmaster Alekhine and Joseph Henry Blackburne in the sense that their prejudice and anti Semitism tarnished their accomplisments.

My Thoughts on Papal Primacy

The Pope's reaffirmation of the primacy of the Roman Catholic Church as the only true church will undermine all future attempts toward reconcillation with the Orthodox churches because the Othrodox hold that the twenty-eighth canon from the Council of Chalcedon which reads as follows:

Canon XXVIII.
Following in all things the decisions of the holy Fathers,
and acknowledging the canon, which has been just read, of the One Hundred and
Fifty Bishops beloved-of-God (who assembled in the imperial city of
Constantinople, which is New Rome, in the time of the Emperor Theodosius of
happy memory), we also do enact and decree the same things concerning the
privileges of the most holy Church of Constantinople, which is New Rome.
For the Fathers rightly granted privileges to the throne of old Rome, because it
was the royal city. And the One Hundred and Fifty most religious Bishops,
actuated by the same consideration, gave equal privileges (ἴσα πρεσβεῖα) to the
most holy throne of New Rome, justly judging that the city which is honoured
with the Sovereignty and the Senate, and enjoys equal privileges with the old
imperial Rome, should in ecclesiastical matters also be magnified as she is, and
rank next after her; so that, in the Pontic, the Asian, and the Thracian
dioceses, the metropolitans only and such bishops also of the Dioceses aforesaid
as are among the barbarians, should be ordained by the aforesaid most holy
throne of the most holy Church of Constantinople; every metropolitan of the
aforesaid dioceses, together with the bishops of his province, ordaining his own
provincial bishops, as has been declared by the divine canons; but that, as has
been above said, the metropolitans of the aforesaid Dioceses should be ordained
by the archbishop of Constantinople, after the proper elections have been held
according to custom and have been reported to him.

Notes.
Ancient Epitome
of Canon XXVIII.
The bishop of New Rome shall enjoy the same honour as the
bishop of Old Rome, on account of the removal of the Empire. For this
reason the [metropolitans] of Pontus, of Asia, and of Thrace, as well as the
Barbarian bishops shall be ordained by the bishop of Constantinople. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.xi.xviii.xxviii.html

This canon and the canons of the Council of Trullo were protested by Leo I and his immediate successors although, some documentary evidence exists to indicate that Pope Ardian I ratified them in 787:

Nearly a century later Pope Hadrian I. distinctly recognizes all the
Trullan decrees in his letter to Tenasius of Constantinople and attributes them
to the Sixth Synod. “All the holy six synods I receive with all their
canons, which rightly and divinely were promulgated by them, among which is
contained that in which reference is made to a Lamb being pointed to by the
Precursor as being found in certain of the venerable images.” Here the
reference is unmistakably to the Trullan Canon LXXXII.
Hefele’s summing up of
the whole matter is as follows:
(Hefele, Hist. of the Councils, Vol. V., p. 242.)
That the Seventh Ecumenical Council at Nice ascribed the Trullan canons
to the Sixth Ecumenical Council, and spoke of them entirely in the Greek spirit,
cannot astonish us, as it was attended almost solely by Greeks. They
specially pronounced the recognition of the canons in question in their own
first canon; but their own canons have never received the ratification of the
Holy See. 358Thus far Hefele, but it seems that Gratian’s statement on the
subject in the Decretum should not be omitted here. (Pars I. Dist. XVI., c. v.)
“Canon V. The Sixth Synod is confirmed by the authority of
Hadrian.
“I receive the Sixth Synod with all its canons. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.xiv.ii.html

The fact that the Papal legates were absent from the vote on the twenty-eighth canon of the Council of Chalcedon and from the Council at Trullo does not necessarily invalidate those canons as Pope Adrian I demonstrated.

I do not argue that the beliefs of the church are outdated. I argue simply that a return to the position taken by Pope Adrian I in 787 on these issues would be more beneficial to the church and would not necessarily alter fundamentally the belief of the church, this possition is illustrated by illustrated by the masses held by Pope Paul VI and Pope John Paul II celebrated with Eastern bishops they omitted the Filioque. Also the Dominus Iesus declaration signed by then Archbishop Bertone who was the Secretary of the Congreggation for the Doctrine of the Faith and then Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, who was then the Prefect of the Congregation. The Declaration was ratified by Pope John Paul II of 6 August 2000, the document omitted the filioque without comment.

Musing on the International Criminal Court

The development of an International Criminal Court are rooted in the Charter of the International Military Tribunal dated 8 August 1945 and Protocol Rectifying Discrepancy in the Charter dated 6 October 1945, Article six of the Charter broadly defined three classes of offenses prosecutable under internation law.

The following acts, or any of them, are crimes coming within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal for which there shall be individual responsibility:

(a) CRIMES AGAINST PEACE: namely, planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression, or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances, or participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the
accomplishment of any of the foregoing;

(b) WAR CRIMES: namely, violations of the laws or customs of war. Such violations shall include, but not be limited to, murder, ill-treatment or deportation to slave labor or for any other purpose of civilian population of or in occupied territory, murder or ill-treatment of prisoners of war or persons on the seas, killing of hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity;

(c)CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY: namely, murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation, and other inhumane acts committed against any civilian population, before or during the war, or persecutions on political, racial or religious grounds in execution of or in connection with any crime within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal, whether or not in violation of the domestic law of the country where perpetrated.

Leaders, organizers, instigators and accomplices participating in
the formulation or execution of a common plan or conspiracy to commit any of
the foregoing crimes are responsible for all acts performed by any persons in execution of such plan.

The text of article six provided the basis the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide adopted in 1948 and the Principles of International Law Recognized in the Charter of the Nüremberg Tribunal and in the Judgment of the Tribunal adopted two years later in 1950 reaffirmed the existence of classes of offenses that are anathemas to civilized societies founded on the rule of law

Principle VI

The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under international law:
(a) Crimes against peace:
(i) Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances;
(ii) Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any
of the acts mentioned under (i).
(b) War crimes: Violations of the laws or customs of war
include, but are not limited to, murder, ill-treatment or deportation to slave-labour or for any other purpose of civilian population of or in occupied territory, murder or
ill-treatment of prisoners of war, of persons on the seas, killing of hostages,
plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns, or
villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity.
(c) Crimes against humanity: Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation and other inhuman acts done against any civilian population, or persecutions on
political, racial or religious grounds, when such acts are done or such
persecutions are carried on in execution of or in connexion with any
crime against peace or any war crime.

Principle VII

Complicity in the commission of a crime against peace, a war crime, or a
crime against humanity as set forth in Principle VI is a crime under
international law.

Principles III and IV of the Principles ofInternational Law Recognized in the Charter of the Nüremberg Tribunal and in the Judgment of the Tribunal, 1950 reaffirmed the doctrine of CommandResponsibility and the concept of agency flowing therefrom as outlined inArticles Seven and Eight of the Charter of the International Military Tribunal which read as follows:

Article 7.

The official position of derfendants, whether as Heads of State or responsible officials in Government Departments, shall not be considered as freeing them from responsibility or mitigating punishment.

Article 8.

The fact that the Defendant acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior shall not free him from responsibility, but may be considered in mitigation of punishment if the Tribunal determines that justice so requires.

The related doctrines of command responsibility and agency as outlined in the documents of the Tribunal are closely linked to the doctrine of Respondeat superior found in the common law.

I find it ironic, paradoxical and hypocritical that United States, the nation that advocated pushed hardest for command responsibility provisions in the Charters of the International Military Tribunal; the International Military Tribunal for the Far East; and the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, refused to ratify the Charter for the international Criminal Court because, of fears that the Command Responsibility and Agency provisions could be utilized to prosecute Americans.


It seems to me that we Americans have forgotten these words:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created
equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,
that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness

The American goverment seems to believe that their position endows them with the ability to act in a manner that to my mind is contrary to the Declaration of Independence of the United States, The Constitution of the United States and the obligations of the United States as member of the international community.

In my mind the ratification of the Statute of the International Criminal Court would serve as benefit to United States because the Statute provides a degree of protection not currently accessible to the American expatriates living abroad.

Musings on the United States

The United States of America stands now at a fork in the road of international diplomacy. There are two paths that stretch out before the United States and its people. One, is the path that leads ultimately to the United States remaining a relevant force on the international stage and retaining its leadership role within the community of nations. The second path leads down the road that will lead in the final analysis to irrelevance and result in the United States becoming a lesser power that longs for the glory, power, prestige, and honor of days forgotten in the mists of time.

Individuals may ask themselves what can be done to prevent the United States from sinking into total irrelevance. The answer my friends is very simple the United States must take the lead on issues where they have long been seen as neutral or acting contrary to the will of the international community.


There are at least four examples of actions that the United States Congress can readily and easily take without violating the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America

1. Ratify the Convention on the Rights and Dignity of Persons with Disabilities of 2006, and its Protocol A/RES/61/106 because, nothing within the text of the Convention in violates the Constitution or the laws of the United States. I would argue that words of the Declaration of Independence and those word inscribed on the Statute of Liberty demand that we the United States take a proactive stand to defend the rights of those who cannot defend themselves.


2. Ratify the 1971 Declaration on the Rights of Mentally Retarded Persons, G.A. res. 2856 (XXVI), 26 U.N. GAOR Supp. (No. 29) at 93, U.N. Doc. A/8429 (1971), and the Principles for the Protection of Persons with Mental Illnesses and the Improvement of Mental Health Care, G.A. res. 46/119, 46 U.N. GAOR Supp. (No. 49) at 189, U.N. Doc. A/46/49 (1991) because, the protection of all individuals is enshrined within the Declaration of Independence

3. Ratify the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, G.A. res. 34/180, 34 U.N. GAOR Supp. (No. 46) at 193, U.N. Doc. A/34/46, entered into force Sept. 3, 1981, and its Optional Protocol Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, G.A. res. 54/4, annex, 54 U.N. GAOR Supp. (No. 49) at 5, U.N. Doc. A/54/49 (Vol. I) (2000), entered into force Dec. 22, 2000 and the
Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women G.A. res. 48/104, 48 U.N. GAOR Supp. (No. 49) at 217, U.N. Doc. A/48/49 (1993). because, the principles contained therein are in accord with the First, Fourteenth, and Nineteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States.

4. Ratify the Convention on the Rights of the Child, G.A. res. 44/25, annex, 44 U.N. GAOR Supp. (No. 49) at 167, U.N. Doc. A/44/49 (1989), entered into force Sept. 2 1990 because the Declaration of Independence is the heart of the Republic and it proclaims the right of all mankind to life liberty and the pursuit of happines and to rob children of the ability to pursue these goals in in my mind akin to crime against humanityand conscience.