Sunday February 2 ,2014 : REBUTTING STOCK ADELSON ATTACKS ON INTERNET GAMBLING (Update)
Adelson's front men follow a predictable format in their op-ed articles, and one poker editor has detailed the glaring inaccuracies and misrepresentations being made.
Chris Grove, the editor of the respected online poker information site Online Poker Report, has taken the time to address in detail the misleading content of the op-ed articles being distributed to US mainstream media by Adelson front-men from his Coalition to Stop Internet Gambling campaign.
The articles all follow a common format, based largely (and it appears loosely) on a letter to Congress in September last year by the FBI, providing its interpretation of possible concerns regarding money laundering.
The Coalition to Stop Internet Gambling, which is funded by land casino mogul Sheldon Adelson, has put its own spin on the FBI letter as it tries to create pressure on Congress to revamp the Wire Act in such a way as to impose a ban on online gambling, apparently with little regard for states' rights in Nevada, New Jersey and Delaware, where intrastate legalization is now in place..
In the latest op-ed from the Coalition, former New York governor George Pataki and James Thackston are again front-and-centre in a piece carried by the mass circulation newspaper USA Today.
The op-ed article follows the usual CSIG format, and Grove has used the opportunity to professionally dissect and critique the piece item by item, finally listing 23 elements that he considers are misleading, hypothetical or spurious.
In concluding his rebuttal, Grove comments:
"Like any new policy, online gambling regulation should be debated. But CSIG doesn’t want a debate of facts and logic.
"They want to create an echo chamber of misrepresentation and fear. And that does a disservice to Americans who are asking for nothing more than the ability to play poker and casino games in a safe, regulated environment online."
Grove's critique is worth reading, and should perhaps be submitted to USA Today in rebuttal of the inaccuracies that the CSIG seems determined to perpetuate.