Jack Thompson Tells Radio Interviewer He Wants to Kill!

well refusing to entertain the belief says you havent looked at both sides of the argument very thoroughly..

no, it means I categorically reject it becasue its ridiculous

its all fekakta in the genectegezoink

even better, you havent even deemed it worth your time to look.

thats an irrational and blinkered attitude mate

got it in one.

it isn't even worth my time to look.

and lemme tell ya, coming from somone with expressed beliefs such as yours, irrational is practically a badge of honor

gotta go, important meeting of the Flat Earth Society...

i knew youd say that, but in reality the unwillingness to look at all sides of an argument and blindly believe something because of your own ideas about likelihood is quite irrational id say.

First of all, I'm not necesarily a democrat thank you. Technically, in a perfect world im some where between libertarian and anarchist, but for the sake of practicality i tend to vote democrat.

Secondly, yes, it does mean that. I linked you to a free documentary full of well though otu and explained facts and sources that pleeds my case, you chose to ignore it. It's like i just told a 5 year old santa clause isnt real and he dismmeses me as crazy because he has recieved presents from the big guy on scheduel every year. Just cause you dont see mommmy and daddy plant the evidence doesnt mean they wherent repsonsible in reality. Grow up.



Picking on my typing is the sadest method of arguing and a common fall back of the froum crowd. I make valid points, you ignore, insult, and critique my grammar. Just cause they where nice enough to let you be manager of the debate team doesnt mean they thought you had a tallent for it, was probably a pitty thing, like the kid with the clipboard at the basketball games.

EDIT:
rational:
being in or characterized by full possession of one's reason;
reason:
a basis or cause, as for some belief, action, fact, event, etc.:

I have reasons(FACTS) for my beliefs. you have your own narrow view of how the world is. Anything that harshly contrasts that view is ignored. That is irrational.

__________

even if it was propaganda, i was hardly spoonfed. but even if that were true, dont you see, you were too? except i have seen propaganda from both sides in that case.

and i made my mind up based on facts, not opinions or wishful thinking.

since ive been posting on here, i have thought of you as an articulate, opinionated person. wether you have agreed with me or not, thats brilliant, i love that s**t. debate and difference of opinion gives me a hard on. but i honestly cant discuss wether or not 9/11 was an inside job with you if you havent looked at both sides of the argument to begin with. which i assumed you had done already

OK, excatly where in there did I accuse you of being a Democrat or even imply it? Becasue I never did. What I said was if there was any truth to this supposed evidence, the Democratic Party (not you) would have brought it up. So you're way off base and showing signs of either paranoia or delusions of grandeur, or both...

Seriously.

The New York Times would be so all about this. Hillary Clinton would be holding a three-ring circus on Capitol Hill. Which is really appropriate, since I always thought of the Clintons as carny folk or grifters, writ large.

Bah, this discussion has given far too much attention to this subject already, I certainly don't intend to dignify it with rational debate, in fact I believe my intent was the opposite, to mock it in any way that seemed amusing to me at the time.

I'll sit here with my "closed mind", if having a "closed mind" means I only have to listen to the paranoid conspiracy theories of my choosing. I don't entertain evidence that the Holocaust never happened, anything about the JFK assasination (I really couldn't care less) or the moon landings taking place anywhere other than Mare Tranquilitas either, what makes your fairy tale any different?

Well, the reason they wouldnt push such an issue is because they woudl get laughed out of town because most of the country is just like you. they would immediatly dissmiss it as crazy because its to far outside the scope of what your willing to accept reality to be.



And you have swiftly taken a turn from being a sometime disagreable person who i enjoy debateing with to a full on stuborn ass, by beeing condiscending and insulting.



The fact that there is a TON of film and photographic evidence, as well as first hand and news reports. This is not the JFK assaistion or the moon landing. There where several hundred, if nto thousand still and video cameras pointed at the towers when the impacts and eventual colapses happened, you are choosing to ignore it. Spend half an hour and watch even part of the documentary i linked. Find a few points from it that you can contest, then come back here and do so. I'm willing, and woudl be glad to be proven wrong. I would be much happier living in a world where my government wasnt capable of murdering thousands of innocent people for political and monetary gain.

Please, prove me wrong.

____________

Yes, most people would think they were crazy if they said it. But you say they have a TON of evidence, crazy, backed up by evidence is not so crazy. They still haven't said anything, therefore, THEY, the people with the most to gain (remember them), must have examined the evidence and found it less than credible.

I distrust the Democratic Party and its allies about many things, using any means or information, aside from that they determine to be patently false and ludicrous, against George W. Bush is one of the few things I trust them absolutely to do a thorough job of.

Finally, if you think your, or anyone else's opinion of me in any way affects me, you must not have been paying attention to much I've ever posted. If it makes you feel any better YOU have metamorphosed from somone I considered a reasonable and reasonable intelligent person, to a gullible whackjob. I find you attempts to badger or shame me into watching watching your fakeumentary disgusting, yet faintly amusing. Are you so lonely and desperate in your beliefs that you will stop to anything to gain converts?

As Melvin Udall said, "Sell crazy someplace else, we're all stocked up here."

Does it not strike you as the tinyest bit odd that Bill Clinton and George Bush Sr. are best friends now? The hero of liberals everywhere and the man behind the iran contra, golfing together. I dont trust either party to do anythign except publicly disagree and then go back on what they say once they are elected.



I'm not lonely, there are many people who believe the same as me. And the only reason for my "desperation" is that i want a proper investigation and justice fo rthose who suffered. Meanwhile, someone i consider to possibly be a mass murderer and a traitor is sitting in the white house and will likely never face any retribution for his crimes.

It must be nice knowing everything about everything. Though i have to wonder what one does with his time when he realises he no longer has anythign left to learn form the world around him. I know you don't give a s**t what i think of you, but if you dont care what anyone thinks of you then you certainly wont be able to do a good job spreading your opinions about. You really must not have much to live for. Thank goodness for video games.



I wouldn't call you crazy so much as sad. Good movie though.

__________

Well here my slice of pie on this one. First back on topic, I understand Jack Thompson wanting to stop kids getting hold of adult games. We once had this problem in the u.k, and it was nipped in the bud from back in the days of SF2 with a rating system (problems still arise though). I think the U.S would be better with the same kind of thing, because it would help shut a lot of people up who give videogames bad press for no reason.

It would also help developers too, who at the moment can get in a sticky mess if their game is like GTA and ends up in a kids console. The Hot Coffee scandal might have never happened in the u.s. There will always be loopholes like mail order though.

What I don't agree with is Jack Thompson's major hate for videogames. His contempt for them is beyond reasoning it seems, when games have a lot of positive aspects he misses, through his staunch religious zealotism. And their I was thinking christian were supposed to encourage an open mind and heart to ideas, views and such. Jack Thompson has made up his mind up videogames are bad, instead of looking at the broad spectrum of games and then assessing.

I guess he's one of these people who thinks a game still has to educate you, when in truth learning all the time is not always fun. Kids and adults gamers know this fact.

Driving games and sport games teach competition, rpgs teach team work towards a common goal. And if you want edutainment Mr Thompson, look no further than Nintendo's Brain Training and Big Brain Academy. While they have been a runaway success he totally fail in even realising there existence.

Best way to solve it I think, is for when any game with a high adult rating is due to be sold, the seller has the right to request age identification (same as with cigs and boozein the u.k, where stores are secretly tested frequently and can be fined or loose their license if they fail), otherwise no sale. Perhaps disclaimers or clear warnings on till receipts for such ganes might also cover stores backs too.

As for 9/11 if it hadn't of happened something else would have eventually in the u.s. They have made a lot of enemies with all their meddling in other nations affairs for a long time (they helped create and train Al Queda but were silly to think things would end once the russians were beaten). What goes around comes around as they say. 9/11 wasn't the first time attacks were made on u.s either.

Try to stay on topic people.

thanks for bringing us back on topic, then dragging 9-11 back into it at the end.

As if, as an American I want to be lectured about interfering in other countries affairs by a Brit...you lot have forgotten more than we'll ever know about the subject, and have probably fairly earned more violent reprisals against you than we ever will.

also, you are fairly ignorant on the subject of Afghanistan, American involvement in the region and al Qaeda.

US helped train Afghan resistance to Russian occupation of Afganistan, not al Qaeda. Al Qaeda is composed of almost exclusively non-Afghans. It was our failure to aid them post-Russian withdrawal which allowed the Taliban to take power, and angered many Afghans who were previously better disposed toward us. Our failure to aid them being motivated by a desire NOT to be seen interfering in the affairs of a Muslim country, and pressure from existing Muslim allies, which backfired, obviously. I will note that Afghanistan used to be a favorite target of British meddling, I believe Kipling called it The Great Game.

Bin Laden's grudge against us arising chiefly from our troops presence in holy Muslim lands (at their invitation) prior to and during the first Gulf War. I suppose you could call that meddling, though if you did, then both World Wars can easily be said to be the product of British meddling. I certainly lay the direct blame for Hitler and the Nazi Party's existence and and rise to power (and the Holocaust, and everything else dependant on such)directly at the feet of Versailles. The similarities between Afghanistan and Taliban are striking, except British were even more to blame, as we merely failed to aid them, while you actively crippled the German economy, with "reparations" for a war that wasn't even fought on your soil, and you were one of the most eager to engage in. Though I suppose I can blame US for allowing our Anglophile President to involve us at all, and him for allowing your extortionist treaty.

Don't even make me run down the litany of British "greatest hits" they read like a who's who of trouble spots around the world. In fact, one of the few troubled areas you haven't mucked about with (that I know of) is North Korea, oh and I suppose Vietnam, that was the French.

Yeah whatever, every country has its sticky fingers in and out of pies. Agree or disagree or whatever.

Now can we get back on topic, I did attempt to. What do you think of what I said about Jack Thompson?