Andrew Rhodes — LiveJournal
Aug. 24th, 2006
Wilmington, NC 28401
Take Two Interactive Software, Inc
Attn: PR Relations, Rockstar Games
To Whom It May Concern:
My name is Andrew Rhodes and I am a 38 year old parent of 1 10 year old child.
I have for the last 25+ years been an enthusiast and player of video games, both computer and console. It has been a part of my life as much as any other form of media has been, whether that media be in the form of books, television, music, movies, magazines, newspaper, or even word of mouth. Video games have also been a part of my son's life, just as other forms of media as I mentioned for myself above. I and my son have experienced a variety of genres within each of those mediums. We both have our likes and dislikes.
And as my son's own parent, I know him very well. Better than nearly every other individual on this planet knows him. As his specific parent, I, as informed as I can be, make decisions that I feel are in the best interest of my own son. I try never to dictate to others what is or is not appropriate for someone else or their children. I offer opinions, as is my right, and suggest other resources for individuals to research to make informed decisions for themselves or their own children. I never condemn nor condone any material as regards what is or is not appropriate for someone else or their child. That is not my right or my job.
Over the past year, as you are aware, there have been many individuals, organizations, and even government officials who have spoken out against your company and its choices of games to develop. Many are mere opinions, which is quite acceptable in a free country such as America. Opinions, positive or negative, have always been welcome, whether they contain details that are true in whole, part, or not at all. After all, opinions lead to debate. And debate, can lead to knowledge, even if some opinions are not wholly truthful.
But, there have also been individuals, organizations, and even government officials who have attempted, using lies and deceit, to dictate their own personal and/or religious beliefs upon others through policy and/or legislation. Many have spoken out against such policy and legislation in the name of the First Amendment and Freedom of Speech. The counter-argument has been that video games are not protected as Speech. This argument may continue back and forth for some time.
However, there is another right being violated by the creation of such policies and legislation. That right being the Parental Right to make decisions for one's OWN children. They have covered up the desire to violate parent's raights through lies and misuse of incomplete or misleading studies. They have exploited the tragedies of other individuals to garner sympathy through misrepresentation. They have even attempted to interfere in some legal cases to manipulate those cases to server their agendas. And even when the attempt to manipulate those cases fails, they continue to claim otherwise.
But I am not one of the gullible. I do not blindly follow the pack I do not give in to insults or abuse. I do not change my position simply because someone makes false claims or even false generalizations about myself, my son, or those I have something in common with. It is that type of bullying and abuse which should be condemned, not a fictional video game, book, movies, or other form of media.
So why write all this to you? Why single you out? It has come to my attention that on Friday, 25Aug2006, a protest has been planned to take place in front of your Manhattan Corporate office. As I understand it, individuals/organizations (as yet identities are unconfirmed are planning to protest your office regarding the yet-to-be-released video game Bully. While it is the right of anyone to have and speak an opinion on any subject, it is not the right of any individual or organization to deprive other individuals either their Freedom of Speech Rights nor their Parental Rights as it applies to making appropriateness decisions for their OWN children.
I, as an intelligent individual, know that rating systems are recommendations, not judgments, on the material being rated, irregardless of method of the rating system. I also am aware that retailers who have policies that adhere to those rating systems are also not passing judgments on the material being sold, but rather attempting to leave the decision of appropriateness in the hands of the parents, allowing the specific parents to make their OWN decisions of appropriateness for their OWN children. But, the policies and legislation being sought by other individuals, organizations, and government officials, attempt to take that Parental Right of make decisions away from the parent and place it in the hands of other individuals (such as judges and juries) or organizations. One such example is the recent claim of an individual to demand, through the courts, that they be granted a copy of the game Bully so that THEY could determine whether said game was or was not appropriate for OTHER PEOPLE'S children. Success or failure of that demand is actually irrelevant as intent was clear. This same individual attempted to have their beliefs dictated through legislation in a variety of states. They have also attempted to demand that certain games be banned altogether in a variety of states by attempting to circumvent Freedom of Speech by way of "public nuisance" laws. Once again, clear evidence of an attempt to dictate to others what is or is not appropriate for other individuals and their children.
So why state what you already know? Because I want it made VERY clear that I am a well informed individual. I also want it clear that if I could, I would be there Friday as well. But not joining the protestors. I would be there in counter protest against them. Not merely in support of Take-Two/Rockstar, but rather, in support of both Freedom of Speech and my Parental Right as a parent to make decisions for myself and MY OWN child. I do not require other individuals, organizations, or the government to revoke my rights to make decisions for my child. Just because my decisions do not conform to their personal or religious beliefs does NOT mean I am making bad decisions. Many individuals raise their children with beliefs, both personal and religious, that I find repugnant. But that does not mean they should have their parental rights overridden by policy or legislation. Whether I believe that the material they expose their children to is appropriate or not, it is not MY right to dictate that belief upon others.
Whether the protest were at your company or any other, rest assured, my defense of Freedom of Speech and the protection of Parental Rights would be the same. I have a variety of positive and negative viewpoints regarding Take-Two and its subsidiaries, but none that would require me to force my beliefs upon you or others. If there were any message I would direct to you, it would be to continue with expanding the imaginations of others, whether that is viewed in a positive or negative light by others.
I have sent a copy of this letter to the New York Times because, just as the protestors may want, and get, attention, letting people know their stance, I think it important that I try to let other people know that there IS another side to this story.
I understand that the same individual who claimed there would be a protest on Friday, also indicated that they were also contacting the city's District Attorney. In what regards is not clear, but in case it had to do with this protest, I would have sent a copy of this email also to him. However, I do not have their email address. The city's website has as webform for contacting the may, but limits the amount of information entered. And the governor of the state also has a webform instead of an email address. I, therefore, cannot get a copy of this email showing my support for Freedom of Speech and the protection of Parental Rights to the city DA.
In all honesty, I doubt that the New York Times will consider my comments worth reporting as only the sensationalism of the protest will matter in the eyes of the media. But, nevertheless, I will attempt to make my voice heard. One can only hope. Even if I am not a citizen of New York, or viewed as "morally adequate" let alone "morally superior" in the eyes of some, my stance of Protection of Parental Rights and allowing parents to make their OWN decisions doesn't require me to be anyone of note, simply because I am not supporting the idea of dictating my personal or religious beliefs upon others.
I wish you good luck with your endeavors and hope that events tomorrow and in the future are peaceful for all involved.
11:01 am - Fallen Behind
Yes, I know, I've fallen behind in my posting. I've been working on the entries, but just haven't gotten them "just right". I'll get to it shortly.
Aug. 15th, 2006
Let's see. Maybe if I start with some demographics, it'll help with some of the earliest parts of my life that I don't
remember a lot about.
Born: November 15, 1967.
Later, I've discovered that I'm the only one of 6 to survive birth. All the other 5 were miscarriages. Reason
unknown. But I do know that there was only 1 that was older than me and the youngest was far enough along to
have been identified as a girl.
Amazing the "what if..."s that come to your mind when you realize your life could have been so much different
with the mere addition of 1 or more siblings. Hundreds of millions of possibilities spring to mind. Sometimes,
you think things would have been better. Sometimes, you think they might have been worse.
I was born in Durham, NC. I lived in a house my parents owned with my father, mother, and both of my mother's
parents. I have no memories of my grandfather, though I'm told he died when I was around 2 years old. For a
long time, I had been told I was the last person he spoke to before he died. Although my father tried to change
that story at one point. I don't believe him. My grandmother died in the mid 70's. I was called home from school
before she did, but I didn't get to see her. I do remember seeing her not long after she died. I can't remember if
it was late at night or early morning. I saw her while I was in bed, probably just waking up. Some might think I'm
nuts. But I learned from a psychology book that it is normal for a child to see a deceased love one once or twice
after the loved one's death. It's usually a way of saying goodbye, especially when you didn't get the chance
before they died. I can live with that. People of religious faith may say more, but I'm satisfied with the
My father is legally blind, since birth and only has a 6th grade education. As far as I know, he'd worked for the
local Lion's Club most of his life if not all his life. He was a severe alcoholic.
My mother has Cerebral Palsy.
Both were serious smokers.
I was born legally blind. Myopia, Anaridia (I have little to no irises), baby cataracts (at the time), and a vision in
both eyes of about 20/200. I also have never been able to smell. Never had it diagnosed why. I also have
recently began thinking that I was, and probably still am, ADHD. That, too, was never diagnosed.
Let's see. Before I started elementary school, I went to a preschool church group in Durham. Oddly enough, I
have difficulty remembering a great many things in my past and some things I do remember, I have a problem
with the chronology. But I actually remember the names of several friends from preschool. To me, that's on the
odd side of things.
I do remember that for the first decade or maybe a little less, we moved to another house, which actually had a
small store attached to it, which my parents (or rather my father) had bought. My father had sold the old house.
And my mother ran the store attached to the new one. I can't remember whether the pinball machine was there
before or after the beer case. But I liked the pinball machine and I constantly borrowed quarters from my
mother to play it. Over time, my father moved us back to the old house (rented it I think) and then back to the
I don't remember much about my father's alcoholism in the earliest of days.
I'm told that, while my grandmother was alive, I was a rather spoiled brat. She wouldn't allow my father or
anyone to severely punish me.
I'm sure I had quite a number of events occur in my earliest life. I know I stuck a straight pin up from beneath a
chair pillow which my father plopped down on. Pliers were needed to remove the pin. I know I put molasses and
ice water on his side of my parent's bed. I know that a heavy wall mirror fell on his head (I don't think I had any
direct involvment in that event). But I don't recall how much of an alcoholic he was during that particular time.
Nor do I remember any other specific events right off hand.
I remember having had dogs as pets (one which lasted from puppy into old age), cats, and fish (30 of which I
killed with dish washing liquid because I, according to my mother, scratched my arm on the metal top of the fish
tank). At what point in time that was, I don't recall. What other events that affected my life before that I don't
recall, though I know it was when I was real young.
I'm sure there were a great many events in my life prior to elementary school. Much of which I'm sure I don't
recall. Others which I can't think of right now. Feel free to ask and I'll answer where I can. I'm not intentially
holding anything back.
Tomorrow, the beginnings of elementary school.
What do I mean?
On GamePolitics.com, in the forum, someone directed us to this article about the game Bully, and John Bruce "Jack" Thompson's desire to force his beliefs upon others by demanding that Florida violate the US Constitution's First Amendment and have the game banned altogether in that state.
As readers of GamePolitics.com, as well as a number of other sites dealing with the issue of video games are aware, John Bruce is quite well known for demanding that states enact laws which clearly violate Parental Rights by deciding FOR parents what is or is not appropriate for their own children. He is also quite well known for lying to and deceiving individuals, organizations, and even government officials about video games, as well as other forms of media. It doesn't take a great deal of searching to find this to be true.
Recently, new details began to surface about the yet-to-be-release video game, Bully. And John Bruce was, of course, one of the outspoken against it. Of course, the new information proved that John Bruce's claims of Bully being a "murder simulator" or a "Columbine simulator" were actually false (no surprise there at all. He even made an appearance on G4TV's Attack Of The Show. The show has been the talk of the blogs over the past week or so.
One such blog I posted to shows part of my stance on this issue, as well as one of John Bruce's own posts prior to my own.
And this is page 2, where my comment is posted:
As you see, I referred to how he wants it all his way or his way (no other option, not even "no way"). And on many occasions, I've posted about Parent's Rights and how such video game laws would violate those rights.
After seeing the TechWeb article mentioned above, I wrote the following to the GP Forum Board:
"This is not just some effort by some 55-year-old guy dictating
entertainment taste for other people's children. I've got a dog in this
hunt and I know where their skeletons are."
Ya know, considering my argument has been against him and the government
trying to dictate to parents what is or is not appropriate for their
children, thereby violating their parental rights, I'd almost think that
was a veiled threat against me.
There's only one serious problem about his "threat". It isn't a threat.
Just because I haven't sat down and wrote all the nasty things in my life,
doesn't mean I wouldn't tell people. I mean, really, what a .... ahem.
Yes, there are nasty things in my past. Things I'm not proud of. But that
doesn't mean I would sacrifice the rights of others just to keep those
things hidden. I've got really, really bad news for him. I have no doubt
that there would be plenty of venom and hate against me for my past. A loss
of friends and respect. But ya know what? I'd sacrifice it all to protect
the rights of others.
He's got a "dog" eh? Guess what John Bruce? You wasted your time and money.
Maybe it wasn't me you were talking about. Maybe it was. But I won't be the
weak link in the protection of the rights of other parents from dictators
and ignorant bigoted gutter trash like you. For years, I've considered
writing a book. Actually, several books. Never good at getting them going
and keeping them going. Not out of pride that I'd want to write my life
story. But merely to put it to paper. But I think I can do a life story on
my LJ page. I'll do it in segments. Obviously, it will take time to do it
all. But I'll try to get started tonight. It'll be unpleasant and probably
have people hating me to the core.
But here's the thing, John Bruce. Here's the core of it. My life, every
sorted detail of it... doesn't change my argument about parents having the
right to decide for their OWN children. It doesn't change the argument that
parents should have access to resources so that they can make their OWN
decisions regarding their OWN children. I don't have to hold superior or
inferior beliefs. I don't have to be superior or inferior in my actions. I
don't even have to be an expert, self-proclaimed or otherwise. I could be
as horrible an individual as has ever existed on this planet. And my
argument would still stand on its own. Because it isn't ME who is making
those decisions for other parents. It isn't ME telling the government to
make those decisions for other parents. I merely say those parents have the
right to make THEIR OWN decisions.
So John Bruce, hope you didn't spend too much on your "dogs". Although, I
hope they are, for your sake, of better quality than the "dogs" you sent to
find the skeletons in Janet Reno's closet. Those "dogs" didn't do squat for
your career back then either, did they?
My first post begins in a little while. I suspect the first one will be rather lame and dull. But rest assured, things will pick up.
Apr. 26th, 2006
07:43 pm - A Comment on the KSNW story
Because of the story done by KSNW on the Kansas school shooting plot, a story that indicated that John Bruce Thompson was once again making false and fraudulent claims
( gamepolitics.livejournal.com/271638.html?thread=21927958#t21927958 ), I sent a comment in to the station regarding the story. The comment is as follows:
I believe in The Truth, The Whole Truth, and Nothing But the Truth.
You want a comment on Mr. Thompson's fraudulent claims in your so-called news story? Here are a large number of facts. Be certain to take ALL of them down. And then follow up with some proper, intelligent, research.
Be certain to read as many entries as possible regarding the issue of video games and violence as well as documentation about Mr. Thompson.
Be certain to read all quotes and information, including the discussion tab information. Be certain to read the information pertaining to the Jason Robidas case, another case which Mr. Thompson attempted to point fingers at video games. Be certain to contact DA Paul Walsh in that case. He'll have some interesting comments to make regarding Mr. Thompson, I'm sure.
Be certain to look at all entries, including the Discussion tab page and it's archives.
Be certain to check out all information, including the "Issues" information and "The Facts" information.
Be certain to peruse the articles there as well as examine the comments by those discussing the issues there, including Mr. Thompson's own comments and remarks.
Please, before you start calling on people to interview, make sure you know the facts about them. Mr. Thompson is well known for making false and fraudulent claims and misleading not only citizens but government officials. One such example is his continuous reference to an as yet released video game called "Bully" which is being developed by Rockstar. In nearly every interview and statement he has referred to the game as a "murder simulator" or a "Columbine simulator" (which actually means the same since reference to Columbine refers to the shootings and murder committed there). Yet he has never actually backed up these claims with FACTUAL evidence. In all the released information regarding the yet-to-be released game, killing is not indicated as an option. And "because it's made by Rockstar", "it's a
Columbine simulator", nor "Trust Me" counts as evidence. There are numerous locations where released information regarding the potential storyline (which is the most important and most misrepresented by
individuals such as Mr. Thompson) and some gameplay. www.gamespot.com is one such location. And of course, I'm sure Rockstar can tell you where other released information can be found.
If anything, in this case, as well as others, Mr. Thompson is actually interfering in the investigation by misleading investigators with false information and false leads.
It's time for you to step up and be real journalists rather than sensationalists. The issue isn't what these kids played, what they read, what they watched on TV, what religions they did or did not believe in. The real issue is what led them down the path they took that ultimately led to their decision. Were they bullied? Were they abused? Were they ignored by adults when they tried either recently or in the past to complain about such things? What was going through their minds? Not fictional materials such as books and games. Time fo you and the investigators to do some real work rather than look for scapegoats to blame.
Apr. 9th, 2006
Re: Mr. Thompson's FBI letter, part 4, conclusion
2006-04-09 01:00 pm (local) (link)
Live Journal itself can ban individuals based on IP addresses. From reported statements, Mr. McCauley has banned the numerous IDs of Mr. Thompson due to violations of rules. And Live Journal has banned at least 1 IP address of Mr. Thompson’s due to violations of rules. Mr. Thompson has apparently, in his “I am above the rules” code of ethics, circumvented those banning attempts by either changing Live Journal IDs and/or IP addresses. Naturally, as part of any probable investigation, it is your responsibility to question Mr. McCauley as well as Live Journal regarding these issues. As to whether it is right or wrong to ban/censor, I cannot answer because I own neither Live Journal or the blog GamePolitics. I neither approve nor disapprove as neither are my “house” to make policy. No more than either belong to Mr. Thompson. While he may have the right to complain to Mr. McCauley and/or Live Journal, it is rather ludicrous that he complain to the FBI or any other legal authority figure.
As to the “Pixelante” t-shirts. He once again makes inflammatory comments in hopes of steering you away from the facts of the issue. It has long been tradition that, through a variety of mediums, individuals who have been persecuted because of one common factor or another have sought ways to display a form of solidarity. In most recent decades, they have been the creation of bumper stickers, brochures, web sites, and, yes, even t-shirts. While Mr. Thompson would have you believe that there is only one reason for the solidarity and that it is only against him, Mr. Thompson fails to point out (as his custom) that there are many reasons that individuals may choose to happily accept being referred to as “pixelantes”. In my personal opinion, I don’t hold the term positive or negative. It is of little import to me. As to other’s opinions, ask them. Ask each of the individuals here their own feelings. Indeed, go as far as asking the individuals at www.pixelantenation.com why they chose the title for their own website. I believe you will find answers far different from Mr. Thompson’s.
Please feel free to have an open dialogue in public with myself here if you wish. If you wish to contact me personally, please follow the instructions I gave you earlier in this statement. I have no objections, though I prefer to meet someone at the Federal building downtown so that I know the contact is real. I have no objections whatsoever. Though I think you will learn more by having an open conversation with myself and others here or elsewhere in a public forum.
Thank you for your time and attention.
P.S. My apologies to GP readers. Once again, I've done it. Another long one. Sorry about that.
Re: Mr. Thompson's FBI letter, part 3
2006-04-09 12:57 pm (local) (link)
For it is Mr. Thompson’s overall actions which deserve notice. Actions which range from the simple childish antics of metaphorically stomping his feet and throwing a fit (his most recent letter to you is actually one such example) to outright lying and deceiving individual citizens all the way up through the political levels of local, state, federal, and even international political figures. Mr. Thompson has, recently, allegedly sent a letter to the state Attorney General of New York. In said letter, he accused the ESRB and more notably it’s president, Patricia Vance, of having committed fraud by misleading citizens regarding content of video games. While it should be left to the AG to decide if such accusations warrant further investigation or not. Nevertheless, it is still rather odd Mr. Thompson make such a claim. Mr. Thompson, himself, has made claims that he has been unable to back up with facts. In numerous situations, both in public interviews as well as letters to several political figures, for example, Mr. Thompson compares a yet-to-be-released video game, called “Bully”, to a “murder simulator”. Yet, at no time has Mr. Thompson ever shown where said game would contain the ability to “kill” characters in the game. You are welcome to investigate such claims yourself to prove whether what I say is true or not. If you should ask Mr. Thompson where his claim originates, please note that “because it’s made by Rockstar”, “it’s a Columbine simulator”, and “Trust me” are not sufficient pieces of evidence. Indeed, if the ESRB is guilty of fraud by not disclosing all information, as Mr. Thompson claims, then he, himself, would be guilty as during many of those public interviews and political contacts, Mr. Thompson fails to provide the fact that, just as there are alleged negative studies regarding video games, there are also positive studies regarding video games and, in fact, actually studies that contradict the negative studies. They are numerous, but to show that I’m not making false claims, you are welcome to contact the ESRB, IEMA, the ESA, or even examine www.videogamevoters.org and examine the menu choice “The Facts” for just some examples.
Therefore, Mr. Thompson has no room to speak regarding titles. Actions, as they say do speak louder than words as do actions speak louder than titles or associations.
“...actively seeks to prevent me from posting defenses of myself at his terrorist site.”
As I have pointed out before, Mr. Thompson likes to use inflammatory terns. He does this as a form of “shell gamery”, where he leads those he hopes to garner support by misleading them with sensitive words in hopes they are ignorant enough to ignore the facts of the issue. It truly is nothing new. Be that as it may…
On the issue of censorship and banning at GamePolitics. I dare not speak for Mr. McCauley, GamePolitics, or even Live Journal. I have made my opinions on the subject in general known. It is also known that, at the least, Live Journal has a number of rules which users must follow. You are welcome to check those rules at www.livejournal.com.
It is known that there are also rules which one must follow on what is, in effect, a moderated forum. Mr. Thompson has, on numerous occasions, violated those rules. Whether one feels that the “punishment” for the violations of those rules are fair or not is irrelevant. The truth is, Mr. Thompson violated those rules and now expects that, unlike his view of everyone else, he is above having to be responsible for his actions. Indeed, he has endeavored to circumvent those “punishments” by creating numerous Live Journal IDs (a Live Journal ID is required to post on the GamePolitics blog) from numerous locations. GamePolitics can only ban individuals based on Live Journal IDs.
(to be continued)
Re: Mr. Thompson's FBI letter, part 2
2006-04-09 12:55 pm (local) (link)
This is an issue of Mr. Thompson’s own decisions to make himself publicly
heard but not wanting to accept the fallout, good or bad, for his actions. Holding an individual responsible for their own actions is one thing. Holding other individuals or groups responsible for the actions of another is something totally different. There are many similar situations, even in today’s climate. It is rather a common thing for individuals, because of some common link, to be blamed for the actions of others. There are times when some groups or organizations are actually overlooked despite that common factor, either through political pressure or outright preferential treatment. Be that as it may, the truth is that anyone making harassing or threatening private contact with anyone is responsible for their own actions. No one else should be. The same is, in fact, true for public contact. It is true that Mr. Thompson is responsible for his own actions. Whether they be public or private.
“…this Dennis McCauley, who was told by another paper to stop portraying himself as a columnist”
This issue has been dealt with publicly as well. Of course, as you’ll note, Mr. Thompson fails to point these facts out. You are certainly welcome to discuss that issue with Mr. McCauley. But from my own perspective, a title does not make an individual good or bad. Indeed, Mr. McCauley could have proclaimed himself “the Lord, God almighty”, and since I am non-religious agnostic, I wouldn’t have believed him anyway. Yet, what is of importance to me on GamePolitics is that Mr. McCauley provides a central area where one may read stories of the day of import to the video game political arena. Just as some individuals choose to read financial news, sports news, entertainment news, or any other focused news report, this site provides news focused on video games and their connection to politics. Were the content of no interest, I would not be reading here. Indeed, how Mr. McCauley refers to himself is of no relevance whatsoever to me. It is the material that is of interest. And because this is a blog, it means that the articles that are posted here grant us, the Live Journal members who read Mr. McCauley’s blog, the ability to comment, positively or negatively to not only the articles, but to each other as well. And, yes, at times that includes to Mr. McCauley as well.
And since the issue seems to be of such interest to Mr. Thompson, I think it is important to point out certain facts regarding titles and their values in regards to him. Mr. Thompson, according to the Florida Bar website, maintains a “Member in Good Standing” title. He also frequently makes note, as he did in his alleged letter to you, that he has appeared on “60 Minutes”. He also frequently comments on having “prepped Hilary Clinton”. And has even thrown it about that he has appeared at a number of senate hearings, state level and federal. And there is no dispute to these claims, the end result remains the same: who cares.
(to be continued)
Re: Mr. Thompson's FBI letter, part 1
2006-04-09 12:50 pm (local) (link)
To any authority figures, FBI or otherwise evaluating posts on this site.
CC: My own LJ Journal page
It has come to my attention, through a public posting on a blog (GamePolitics), hosted by Live Journal (www.livejournal.com), that one John Bruce “Jack” Thompson has decided to contact you. The probability of Mr. Thompson not even contacting you, hence I have not sent this statement through email or US mail. I have no doubt that you are far more busy dealing with issues of higher import. However, the probability that someone may be assigned to investigate also exists which is why I’ve chosen to make this statement public for any investigator to see.
Mr. Thompson’s claims, while filled with wonderfully inflammatory phrasing and sensationalistic references, which tends to be par for the course for Mr. Thompson, has misled you regarding certain facts. While I am certain that others will more eloquently comment to you regarding these issues, I feel the need to include my voice as well.
If my honor or ethics in any way is brought into question, please feel free to contact me through the Wilmington, NC Police Dept. As an avid internet user, as many are, releasing too much private information would encourage identity theft (though considering my current financial condition and credit situation, they are welcome to it).
Before the issue comes up, my name is Andrew Rhodes. I am the 38 year old parent of 1 10 year old son. I have willing chosen to make this statement through my own choices and not based on the request nor demand of any individual or organization. Contrary to popular belief, I do have a mind of my own and freely make my own decisions. I am a video game player as is my son. Also contrary to popular belief, neither of us take illegal drugs or misuse legal drugs in any way. Neither of us drinks alcohol. Neither of us smokes. I have not been convicted of a violent crime, or any crime for that matter, at any point of my life, nor has my son. And though I have had my problems with violence, the overwhelming majority of them took place in the late ‘70s, very early ‘80s. And my son has not been accused of any criminal act, to date.
Moving on to the issue at hand, the alleged letter which Mr. Thompson posted.
“…is presently facilitating anonymous postings attacking me, thereby inciting the sending of harassing emails to me in violation of a recently passed federal law.”
Mr. Thompson does not point out that in fact, posts made in the public arena actually make reference to actions of his own doing. Either through his own postings or public relations through political contact, news interviews, and talk show interviews. He fails to point out that it is his direct actions which actually incite any form of contact with him. Mr. Thompson is well known, all the way to the international level, as following the ideal of “don’t take responsibility for your own actions, blame someone else”. Make note that I am not condoning nor condemning any contact with Mr. Thompson, public or private.
(to be continued)
10:28 am - For posterity sake 2...
The following was also posted to the same article as the other "For posterity sake..." post.
It's link is/was:
"Jack Thompson thinks it's great...
2006-04-09 08:10 am (local) (link)
That pixelantes are so self-deluded that they think a term that points out their practice of targeting those with whom they disagree for death threats, obscene e-mails, and the like is somehow a badge of honors.
Kind of like Nazis and Talibanis saying "Hey, look at me. I've got my Adolf Hitler underwear on!" Or "Hey, I've got my Talibani jockstrap on in this Afghan rape room."
So, party on Wayne. Party on Garths. You're so stupid that you don't even know what the terrorist epithet means. Duh.
Oh, and proof that the Thug in Chief is GP's Dennis McCauley: He allows posts here defaming me, and yet, in wonderful defense of freedom of expression, he just "banned" jack12345678 from posting this response to the above idiotic question. Wow, what a First Amendment hypocrite Dennis McCauley is.
Hey, Dennis, tell these Pixelante Thugs about the threatening letter you sent me saying I can't post at this site? Gee, looks like I can, Dennis, despite your efforts.
Oh, and Dennis, tell us all about how the St. Paul Pioneer Press ordered you to stop lying about your status as a "columnist" there. That's the real reason you've ineffectually tried to "ban" me here. You don't want the gaming community to know you are a disingenuous fraud. Jack Thompson
Hooah! Jack Thompson"
Navigate: (Previous 10 Entries)