Jack Thompson Includes Gay Porn With Court Filing 333
An anonymous reader writes "Jack Thompson has done it again, now by making available gay porn for unlimited viewing on public records. Judge Jordan wrote on an issued order: 'The attached exhibit, which includes several graphic images of oral and genital sex between adult males, was filed electronically in the docket in this case, without prior permission from the court... To the extent that the other attorney's alleged conduct is in any way relevant... there was no need for Mr. Thompson to file these graphic images in the public record. A simple reference to the website and its alleged links would have sufficed...'" I'm usually not a fan of giving Thompson continued free publicity, but some of the things he does are just too outlandish not to share.
Uh, thanks, Jack. (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Uh, thanks, Jack. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Uh, thanks, Jack. (Score:4, Funny)
They were, after all, self-portrait.
Does he have a "Wide Stance"? (Score:5, Funny)
Against it or for it - you know that when he's obsessed - he's a Homo.
Re:Does he have a "Wide Stance"? (Score:5, Insightful)
In Thompson's case, I doubt it. The guy is just an attention whore. He'd do anything providing it got him attention.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Does he have a "Wide Stance"? (Score:5, Interesting)
The fact that X is the likely cause of outcome Y in situation Z does not mean that X must be the likely cause of outcome Y in all situations. That is a false generalization. This morning my telephone rang because I had placed a wake up call the night before. That does not mean that this is always the reason that a telphone rings or even the most likely reason for a telephone to ring, it is however the most likely reason in a hotel.
Bin Laden has a deep seated hatred of all the inconvenient obstacles that lie between him and control of Saudi Arabia. He was quite happy to co-operate with the US when it suited him. When he fell out with the Saudi monarchy he resented the fact that it would be difficult to replace them with so many US bases on Saudi soil.
Bin Laden has since fallen in with Zawahiri who has provided him with a means of rationalizing his hatred. Zawahiri in turn is obsessed with the idea of replacing the government of Egypt. He was instrumental in the assasination of Sadat in 1981 and took over the leadership of Islamic Jihad. Zawahiri's proximate complaint was the peace treaty with Israel.
It is difficult to discuss Bin Laden rationally due to the propensity of wingnuts to deliberately take statements out of context for their own purposes. Bill Moyer was quite right to point out that the epithet 'coward' is thrown arround as if it were a purely normative ethical statement. It is necessary to proceed in small steps. Understanding the enemy in their true light is always important. The flaw in Bin Laden's ideology is the fact that he starts from utterly false premises, not a mere flaw in his logic or an inability to apply logic (aka irrational). He is not irrational in the sense of being entirely unpredictable or acting from entirely arbitrary impulses. Nor is his behaviour is self-defeating, on the contrary he has been allowed to achieve many of his political goals, in particular the demand that every terrorist makes and almost none achivies: to be treated as a political actor rather than a common criminal.
Thompson's bizare actions on the other hand...
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Whatever your particular ideological stripe, I think it's very important to understand bin Laden, and, in general those who advise him, help him and serve him. I agree, the word "coward" has been spread around, despite the fact that the motif of the pursued hero hiding from evil, powerful forces is a widespread one in many cultures (for example Robin Hood), and certainly is not meant to demonstrate the hero's cowardice, but rather his cleverness and
Re:Does he have a "Wide Stance"? (Score:4, Insightful)
There's a tension between understanding and demonizing. To win, you must often adopt a false, derogatory image of the enemy. In WWII, the US created a propaganda image of Germans as pompous buffoons. In reality, they were probably the best military on the planet. But we needed to mock them; how else do you get the nerve to face the most efficient killing machine on the planet?
When Bush first called the 9/11 attackers "cowards", I was very displeased by the inaccuracy of the remark. Over the next several years, I gradually realized that it's not his job to provide accurate analysis of those guys; it's his job to fling feces at the other team, attacking their confidence and self-image.
I would like him to go further, and attack the whole idea that shahids (martyrs) will be rewarded in Paradise. Not that I expect prospective martyrs to believe GW Bush, but when party A has a very clear story, and party B has no rebuttal, it's hard to blame people for siding with party A.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
From what I understand (sorry, I don't have a source) during the jihad against the USSR, Bin Laden never knew the extent of American support. The Pakistani ISI served as a buffer.
Of course the US was importing, sheltering and encouraging global jihadists, including the sheik who would later attack the WTC for the first time, but I think the ISI insulated the muj in Afghanistan, giving them weapons and supplies without making them feel like tool
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Does he have a "Wide Stance"? (Score:5, Interesting)
Most likely they are.
There was a study performed in the '90s where both normal and homophobic men were shown heterosexual and gay porn. They found;
re: poor citation, try again (temptation != sin) (Score:3, Informative)
Quoting "Is Homophobia Associated With Homosexual Arousal?" (Adams, et al.):
"Whereas difficulties of objectively evaluating
psychoanalytic hypotheses are well-documented, these ap-
proaches would predict that sexual arousal is an intrinsic re-
sponse to homosexual stimuli, whereas Barlow's (1986) theory
would predict that sexual arousal to homosexual stimuli by ho-
mophobic individuals is a function of anxiety. These competing
notions can and should be e
Re: poor citation, try again (temptation != sin) (Score:4, Interesting)
And I applaud your ability to spin even the most minor quibble by the authors into a denial of the finding.
The section I quoted was from the précis of the full article. A summary if the findings, in other words. That summary states clearly that homophobic men were observed to respond to gay sex where non-homophobic men did not.
It is an observation, where Barlow's paper suggests that anxiety causes the response is a hypothesis.
If you choose to believe a large collection of random homophobes simultaneously produced boners at a gay stag movie because they were scared, when an equal number of non-homophobes did not, then I'll not argue, but that still lives us with an obvious conclusion.
Homophobes are either queer or wimps.
Confused Christian (Score:4, Insightful)
> offender" (1 Corinthians 6:9) means doing something sexual to someone of the same sex. If
> you refuse to follow the stimulus then no "sin" is committed (YMMV). Just as if you're
> tempted to steal but don't you are not a thief, etc..
It is not really relevant, as the accusation of being homosexual in this context refers to being attracted to your own gender.
> The you-hate-it-means-you-are-one argument is quite an intriguing one (I hate bananas!).
If you really emotionally hate bananas, rather than just disliking the taste of them, I'd believe some interesting psychological artifact must lie behind. Could it be that they a vaguely phallic, and thus remind you of sides of your own sexuality that makes you uncomfortable?
> It's logically flawed, of course, but is a "stronger" argument for those lacking any
> factual basis than a simple ad-hominem attack as it's hard to refute against a weak
> minded opposition.
In general yes, like many generalizations, but for a specific case, no.
I came independently to the conclusion in my youth because a (at the time) common "rational" argument for suppressing homosexual practice was that if everyone were allowed to practice homosexual sex, there would be no children, and the human race would go extinct. That argument makes only sense for someone who is attracted to his or her own gender.
> Of course the reason you hate theists is because you realise the truth about your
> relationship with god but don't want to admit it.
I believe people who hate theist have some deep emotional problems, typically dating back to their childhood, growing up in a suppressive theist environment. Atheism is, by nature, not something the "believers" tend to feel strong about. There really isn't anything there to feel strong about. All the fanatical atheists I have meet have been reformed theists. Their hate is part of their liberation process. Similar to how the most fanatical anti-smokers and anti-drinking people are former addicts.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's pretty cool. Once you get over the need to thing that there is an ultimate "gods eye view" truth, and accept the idea that the 'truth' depends on perspective, it makes a lot of sense.
For eg, hawk eats mouse. To the mouse, that is bad. To the hawk, that is good. How can a situation, the same exact situation, be both bad and good? Depends on the perspective.
Kind of sucks. I wish it were not true. But the truth is subject to time and place. Bummer.
Re:Does he have a "Wide Stance"? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Uh, thanks, Jack. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Uh, thanks, Jack. (Score:4, Funny)
As it stands, I'm still wondering what this has to do with videogames and am a little scared to RTFA for fear of getting goatse.cx'd.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Do you see the REAL deepthroats in this court room?
I'm sure the judge was nothing short of agog to issue a BINDING GAG order for this non-condomnable act inasspicious.
Filing paper beats ORAL discourse, I'm sure.
Will the judge hold him IN CONTEMPT IN court?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Gack! Fix the headline -- quick! (Score:5, Funny)
s/filling/filing
I said it before... (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Brilliant! (Score:5, Funny)
So you made it a story on /.?
Here's to you, Mister Hide It in Plain View Guy!
Re: Brilliant! (Score:3, Informative)
You do understand the use of the conjunction "and", don't you? The AC writing the comment asserts that actions described in phrase A ("you make a joke mocking the person for being unaware of the information you ignored") are combined with the conditions in phrase B ("And it's modded "Funny"?").
So he's not being crabby just because you misread the sentence, but because you also got modded funny for your off-base mockery. This whole explanation is Tongue-in-Cheek jest.
Cheers,
~Rebec
I love this guy. (Score:5, Interesting)
How will you top this, Mr. Thompson? Are you gonna shoot the Pope?
Re:I love this guy. (Score:5, Informative)
Re:I love this guy. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I love this guy. (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
There's a progression;
subpoenas -> pornpenis -> nopennies
Expect him to protest the new one-cent coins on the grounds that Lincoln was of questionable sexuality, and wholly undeserving of a coin of his own.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:I love this guy. (Score:4, Funny)
Sounds like a win-win situation to me, though the pope could easily deflect the bullets by using the immense power of the Dark Side of the Force and then it's just a crazy-ass lawyer who's out of bullets up against an incredibly powerful Emperor who could crush all of his internal organs into sandwich paste with sheer will power. We'd still have Pope Palpatine but at least we'd be rid of Thompson.
How can you not love this guy? (Score:5, Funny)
Someday REM will sing a song about him.
Re:How can you not love this guy? (Score:5, Funny)
And Jim Carrey will star as Thompson in a bio, and will give a stirring speech at the end talking about how filing explicit pictures of gay sex and trying to censor anything that makes him angry is the American way. Carey will go on to win his first Oscar, and Thompson will file suit against him for character assassination, and will include pictures of beastiality.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
He stuck his
Head up his ass...
Head up his ass...
Re: (Score:2)
Let's see, according to the article, he included "several graphic images of oral and genital sex between adult males." Maybe he should include several graphic images of oral and genital sex between adult females. I am sure he would get far fewer objections.
BTW:The definition of obscenity is "whatever gives a judge an erection. [quoteworld.org]"
Next... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I hear the next part of his plan is to sue someone for $54 million over a pair of pants. [wjla.com] Which brings him to step 3, profit.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Sad part... (Score:5, Insightful)
He is over estimating how 'horrified' people are by homosexuality, believing that by bringing these images to the courts attention that he is somehow unmasking the horrors of Mr Kent's orientation.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Sad part... (Score:5, Funny)
There, fixed.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, another theory concerning this 'gay porn' flap is that he is trying to provoke the judge into saying something sufficiently negative that he can claim the judge is bias and be thrown off the case.
It has, unfortunately, worked in the past.
Re:Sad part... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
"Court filling"? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:"Court filling"? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
I Motion To... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I Motion To... (Score:5, Funny)
Honesty... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Honesty... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Here's Google News [google.com] on Thompson. I got three pages in, finding a single non-negative reference to him. If someone has the energy to dig deeper, please let me know where all the "interviews" and "lawmakers" come in.
Sorry, kids, but if you want to Do Something Really Important, it's going to have to be more ambitious than ridiculing this irritating but unfortunate guy.
Re: (Score:2)
Form the Wikipedia article on JT [wikipedia.org]:
Re: (Score:2)
Bullshit (Score:3, Insightful)
No, the reason he gets attention is because he's trying to infringe on our rights and has enough power to be dangerous.
If he was some nut screaming on a street corner, we'd ignore him, but he shows up on MSNBC, so he needs to be rebutted.
Absolute Bullshit (Score:2)
And then...
Lots of people try lots of things. It doesn't mean that they should be taken seriously. It's a fact that the only people that still take Jack Thompson seriously ha
Re:Honesty... (Score:4, Interesting)
He gets attention from us because the media takes the man seriously. At least, they did before this -- I'm not sure how many interviews he'll get after this.
He is ridiculous, no one will argue that point (except perhaps Jack Thompson), but he is still a threat because he believes he is right and has not yet been discredited in the media.
Actually, I'm surprised the nut isn't cohosting a show with Nancy Grace yet, now that I think about it.
Re: (Score:2)
Tell me about it. This fucker is like a dog that won't die. As another poster said this guy used to be funny, now he is just pathetic.
Re:Honesty... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Honesty... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Honesty... (Score:5, Interesting)
No! More airtime for Jack! (Score:2)
Give this guy enough rope to hang himself and his agenda.
Just Jack! (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Just Jack! (Score:5, Informative)
The reality is, they probably don't have anyone who will admit to being gay since it carries the death penalty.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, of course not; it carries the death penalty.
Either way, the man is a nut.
Jack, c'mon... (Score:4, Funny)
Maybe the judge is closeted? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
On what basis? Gay porn is not illegal to view. No one's life is in danger. The court is not in the business of obfuscating from the public what happens in the courtroom. Once you go down that road then you may as well start correcting grammatical errors and spelling of affidavits, witnesses' testimony and whatever else the Judge thinks the public may not want to see. What if there was no porn but material which cr
Re:Maybe the judge is closeted? (Score:5, Interesting)
Had he presented this in a court-room, it likely would have been a different story.
Well... (Score:2)
(after reading article)
EWWWWW!! I dont wanna know!!
Re: (Score:2)
I saw the other stories but (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What rock have you been living under? Is there room under there for two?
Re: (Score:2)
Why hasn't he been disbarred yet? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
It'll happen, sooner or later.
This story was submitted by an AC..... (Score:2)
Oh, come on, Jack! (Score:2)
What's next, is he going to call Rick Astley [yougotrickrolled.com] as a witness?
Text of His Court Filing (Score:2)
It all makes sense now. (Score:5, Insightful)
Jack Thompson feels that by cleaning the world, his internal struggle will diminish and he will become a normal and productive human in the near future. The fool crusade he runs is selfish and in no way there to benefit humanity as a whole.
There is possibly quite a bit more 100 million video game systems out there. Yet if video games turned people violent, then there's be at least 1-20 million murders a year related to video games, providing that is 1-20% conversion rate. yet the fact is that quite possibly 0.00004% video gamers turn criminally violent.
There are over 17,000,000 registered gun users in the USA alone, yet we dont have murder numbers that even come close to that. 99.99901% of gun crime is done by Illegaly obtained fire arms. I've known many gamers who play violent games and own real guns. Yet somehow they have failed to kill anyone.
Jack plays a numbers game formatted to his own crusade. He wants to win for once, since pretty much every other crusade he has taken up failed in some way.
Jack needs a psychiatrist to help him, not an end to the worlds deviance. Any lawyer who sends his photo ID with batman pasted over it, has some sort of mental ailment that needs professional help.
To JAck, I hope you get well. Just dont bring down the rest of the world because of your war with your inner demons. Just fight youw own internal battle and let us govern ourselves.
Re:It all makes sense now. (Score:5, Insightful)
Jack is clearly an overly aggressive person (I know, "No shit!"). It wouldn't surprise me in the least if he were a closet homosexual, or at least a latent homosexual who tries violently to deny it to himself.
Re:It all makes sense now. (Score:5, Interesting)
During a divorce, Hager's wife alleged that he had raped and sodomized her while she was asleep under the influence of prescription medication. His defense was that he had gotten lost and hadn't meant to sodomize her. (I forget how he got around the whole unwanted sex part of the charges.) Yes, a gynecologist couldn't find his wife's personal parts.
Sigh.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Oh, the morony! (Score:2)
Rename your files, Jack! (Score:4, Funny)
Disbarred (Score:2)
Only possible justfication... (Score:4, Insightful)
I'd be the last to defend this wacko in general, and I can't read his pea brain to fathom his motives, but when dealing with images from websites that are to be used as some sort of evidence in a lawsuit or other court filing, it may be that simply providing a URL to the images has its potential pitfalls. Websites and links, especially for pr0n, come and go, and it would be pretty frustrating to provide the URLs, then to find that by the time someone gets around to viewing them, there's nothing but a 404 or some abandoned domain holding page there. Sure, maybe there's a cache of it on Google or Wayback or somewhere, but maybe there isn't. Then you have to try to see if there is a cache of the page sitting on some other server somewhere, and it gets more complicated.
Personally, if I had a legal case that depended on some image or text on a website, I'd rely not on an image, transcript, or URL reference, but would want to take a screenshot of a browser displaying the page in question, as well as the date and time stamp. That would seem to be of far more evidentiary value in the event that the site gets nuked in an attempt to cover someone's ass.
(And yes, I realize that last sentence left y'all wide open to make some humorous gay pr0n reference....have at it.)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm not just talking about gay porn here, I'm talking super-violent images or anything else that would normally be considered "inappropriate" for the public record.
Now on the other hand, I think it's a double-standard that one could file a motion and attach a graphic image o
Its probably (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Goatse! (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
w/ Jack Thompson whom is just a jackass lawyer