Topic: Jack Thompson is a terrorist

[Smash_Brother]

Although his method is indirect, JT is still very much a textbook terrorist.

Terrorists use the fear of violence as a means to manipulate people into doing their bidding.

JT uses the fear of violence to forward his personal agenda.

What's the difference?

JT is using the same fear of violence that terrorists use, only that he isn't personally claiming that he will perpetrate this violence. In the end, the effect is the same: people are seeded with fear in the hopes that they can be manipulated by the seeder.

Again, how is he NOT a terrorist?

[BlackNMild2k1]

Because he's not [insert stereotypically terrorist race/religion here]


OMG thats racist!!!! and religious profiling!!!!

[Smash_Brother]

Actually, the fact that he's thumping the bible all over is what will keep him from that comparison more than anything.

I'd like to go up against him in court and pull this argument on him, pointing out that he's using fear and religion to manipulate people.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

So Sony is a terrorist causing us to fear the fact that Wii doesn't take advantage of our HD home theater setups?!

[GoldenPhoenix]

The only difference is um, terrorists actually kill people and cause destruction, Thompson is a egotistical butthead that acts tough. There is a difference.  

[ShyGuy]

Wow, any response to this thread is going to move it ever so closer to the PHAIL TRAIN.

terrorism: the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion

terror: violent or destructive acts (as bombing) committed by groups in order to intimidate a population or government into granting their demands.

[GoldenPhoenix]

Quote
Originally posted by: ShyGuy
Wow, any response to this thread is going to move it ever so closer to the PHAIL TRAIN.

terrorism: the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion

terror: violent or destructive acts (as bombing) committed by groups in order to intimidate a population or government into granting their demands.

Shyguy you are a terrorist! You are using the fear of this thread failing to get people to meet your demands!

[vudu]

I expect Windy will receive a letter from Jack Thompson in 3 ... 2 ... 1 ...

[KDR_11k]

The media is a bunch of terrorists.

Hell, the US government qualifies as terrorists under that definition.

[stevey]

"The only difference is um, terrorists actually kill people and cause destruction, Thompson is a egotistical butthead that acts tough. There is a difference."

What about all of the ex-rockstar programmers that got lay off and latter starved to death because of Jack Thompson constant lawsuits and boycotts...

[Smash_Brother]

Quote
Originally posted by: GoldenPhoenix
The only difference is um, terrorists actually kill people and cause destruction, Thompson is a egotistical butthead that acts tough. There is a difference.

Terrorists don't need to kill or destroy anything to be terrorists.

Terrorists are always taking credit for attacks that they aren't responsible for and JT is always blaming acts of violence on video games that didn't happen because of video games. Both want to convince people of the existence of a threat by saying "See? I told you so!" even when they were lying about the source of the threat.

The primary difference between JT and an islamic fundamentalist who threatens people via use of a video tape filled with angry messages is that the fundamentalist isn't misleading anyone about the fact that he is using fear in an attempt to manipulate. His goals are generally crystal clear and he is still called a terrorist regardless of whether or not he or his men commit any ACTUAL acts of violence.

But JT uses fear under the guise of it being for some greater good instead of furthering his own political agendas.

So if we call men who openly and honestly use terror to manipulate "terrorists", why do we not call men who covertly use terror by the same nomenclature?

[Ian Sane]

None of the violence that Thompson points to is related to him.  He didn't have anything to do it and those that did were not pushing the same agenda.  The Virginia Tech shooter didn't kill people to intimidate people into going against videogames.  Jack Thompson may look at something like that and try to associate it with his agenda but in actuallity it's unrelated.  I think a terrorist has to be someone who actual causes violence or supports someone who does.

"Terrorists are always taking credit for attacks that they aren't responsible"

Yeah but it's not like Osama Bin Laden claims credit for terrorist acts caused by people not related to his cause.  He would only claim responsibility for an Islamic related terrorist act because that's his agenda.  Thompson tries to attach his agenda to unrelated acts.

And if Thompson is a terrorist by your definition then so is the media and a whole sh!t load of politicians.  Hell MADD are terrorists because everytime someone gets killed in a drinking and driving accident they associate it with their cause.  MADD points at stuff like that and says "this is why drinking and driving is bad".  Well I guess they're using fear to manipulate us.  Damn MADD terrorists.  Let's not forget those horrible DARE people as well.  And anti-smoking groups.

[Smash_Brother]

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
None of the violence that Thompson points to is related to him.  He didn't have anything to do it and those that did were not pushing the same agenda.

Terrorist groups will claim responsibility for acts which they have no personal stake in if it will earn them the intimidation factor they're looking for.

The goal of the terrorist and Thompson are not to have the violence happen, but to acquire power from it when it does happen. If Thompson had all the power he wanted, he wouldn't show up every time a violent act potentially linkable to gaming happened, just as terrorists have no reason to threaten if they are content with the situation of their country/people.

Quote
Jack Thompson may look at something like that and try to associate it with his agenda but in actuallity it's unrelated.  I think a terrorist has to be someone who actual causes violence or supports someone who does.

So the people who threaten and then don't follow through aren't terrorists?

Quote
Yeah but it's not like Osama Bin Laden claims credit for terrorist acts caused by people not related to his cause.  He would only claim responsibility for an Islamic related terrorist act because that's his agenda.  Thompson tries to attach his agenda to unrelated acts.

Bin Laden doesn't need to be taken seriously, hence why he doesn't need to attempt to get his name attached to causes he has no relation to.

However, I'm sure smaller groups who are trying to get their name out there who would have no problem adjusting their "cause" on the fly 1) because odds are no one has heard of them or their cause so it's still up in the air and 2) the goal is not to stick to their cause but to acquire power. That's what terrorism is about: power.

Quote
And if Thompson is a terrorist by your definition then so is the media and a whole sh!t load of politicians.  Hell MADD are terrorists because everytime someone gets killed in a drinking and driving accident they associate it with their cause.  MADD points at stuff like that and says "this is why drinking and driving is bad".  Well I guess they're using fear to manipulate us.  Damn MADD terrorists.  Let's not forget those horrible DARE people as well.  And anti-smoking groups.

No, because MADD is composed of mothers who have lost children to drunk driving accidents and want to keep it from happening to others. MADD has no political aspirations. MADD has no goals beyond its expressed purpose and I suspect its members don't either.

JT, on the other hand, has other goals, goals which he is not being honest with the rest of the world about. To my knowledge, he has never lost anyone in a "gaming" related incident, nor does he have any real stake in it other than to use it as a "cause" to gain recognition and then political standing.

JT is using fear to further his own goals which he isn't honest about, hence why his use of fear is not only unjustified but also malicious.

[GoldenPhoenix]

I think Jack Thompson's goal is to make alot of money off far fetched ideas, which are spread by topics like this. The more hatred that comes out towards him the more powerful he gets. Besides he does have freedom of speech like anyone else, no matter how idiotic or "malicious" it may sound.

[Smash_Brother]

He has presidential aspirations. He's made that evident on a few occasions.

This was the crusade which Thompson hoped would make him look like an upright defender of American morals and values. It didn't work nearly to the extent that he wanted because, at this point, most major news outlets won't accept any commentary from him because they know he's insane.

[wandering]

I read the title as "Jack Bauer is a terrorist". I was going to say that I agree.

As for Jack Thompson...engh, I don't know. I don't think he inspires terror in anyone. Maybe alarm. Let's call him an alarmist.  

[Ian Sane]

"No, because MADD is composed of mothers who have lost children to drunk driving accidents and want to keep it from happening to others. MADD has no political aspirations."

I'd say they still have political aspirations, they're just ones that are open and people tend to universally agree with.  MADD can have an effect on drinking and driving laws.  That's political.  It just isn't very controversial or selfish like Thompson is.

I would consider someone only a terrorist if they're dangerous.  They have to either be responsible for terrorism or have the intent to cause it or at least make people THINK they will cause it.  Thompson isn't dangerous, or at least not in any violent way.

This whole thread is just playing dictionary.  We're discussing the literal meaning of a word.  I'm looking more at the practical usage of the word "terrorist" in the public.  Based on how 99% of the population uses the word "terrorist" Jack Thompson does not fall into that category.  He would never be convicted of terrorism or be on the CIA's top ten list or anything like that.  Having such a general definition of "terrorist" just makes the word meaningless.

[ShyGuy]

I made it to the fifth level playing dictionary, but then I got killed by the lava boss.

[Smash_Brother]

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane This whole thread is just playing dictionary.  We're discussing the literal meaning of a word.  I'm looking more at the practical usage of the word "terrorist" in the public.  Based on how 99% of the population uses the word "terrorist" Jack Thompson does not fall into that category.  He would never be convicted of terrorism or be on the CIA's top ten list or anything like that.  Having such a general definition of "terrorist" just makes the word meaningless.

I'm not trying to play dictionary here. I'm only pointing out how thin the line is between Thompson and your run of the mill terror cell.