Federal GTA Lawsuit

Suit seeks to ban sales of popular video game (thanks Mike Martinez): "A lawsuit by Haitian groups that asks for the top-selling video game 'Grand Theft Auto: Vice City' to be removed from store shelves will be decided in federal court. " Also, Give Back Take Two (thanks Hump and Steve Nutley) has complaints from The New York Post about GTA, apparently making the case for how depicting violence in a game is worse than molestation: "This is 10,000 times worse than the worst thing anybody thinks Michael Jackson ever did to a little boy."
View : : :
147.
 
Re: Nukes
Jan 8, 2004, 16:08
Re: Nukes Jan 8, 2004, 16:08
Jan 8, 2004, 16:08
 
Ok I just have to get involved with this because as an American I think its my duty to let people know not everyone in the USA is such a moron as Inkswitch.

As for freeing the rest of the oppressed people of the world. I am all for it. It's the Libs who pulled out of Viet Nam and started all this. They left those people hanging. It's that mentality that keeps us from helping others. The Libs didn't even want to retaliate after being attacked on our own soil. How are you gonna convince them to help other people when they won't even defend themselves. When it is even suggested, the anti-war faction comes to the fore and quashes it

Ok lets see... The first thing is you keep referring to a group of people called the "Libs" who seem to be what’s wrong with everything in this country. Kind of reminds me of Hitler and his constant mention of the Jews causing the problems, but that’s another argument.

First of all, Vietnam started during the Kennedy administration. That abortion of a war kept going during the failed Nixon administration and after 15 years and tens of thousands of dead Americans the troops were pulled out. Ford was president during that time and guess what *gasp* he was a republican. 80 percent of the country wanted that war to end and yes that included conservatives. So I don't know what "Libs" your talking about but most of American was united in getting out of there.

It's that mentality that keeps us from helping others

Yeah I guess FDR really didn't want to get rid of the Nazi's and Woodrow Wilson wanted Europe to be under German control too? Both of whom were founders of Modern "Liberalism" which by the sound of it you don't know what it is. Oh and I almost forgot, I guess Clinton really couldn't have cared less about the thousands of people being slaughtered in Kosovo and Bosnia? Read some books moron and you won't sound like such a fool.

The Libs didn't even want to retaliate after being attacked on our own soil. How are you gonna convince them to help other people when they won't even defend themselves

Third, the only people who were against the war in Afghanistan were a small band of people who are always against war no matter what. I would hardly paint all "Libs" like that, just like most people wouldn’t paint all conservatives as Racist Christen Fundamentalist Anti-Semites either because of a few David Dukes and Klan-type organizations.

I find it disgusting that I have to pay for foodstamps, welfare, and other costs for able-bodied people to sit on their asses without working when we have to go out of the country to find labor. The reason stated is that Americans won't take those jobs. This is true. Why would they take those jobs when they can make a better living by not working at all and watching TV all day?

I don't even want to touch that. You obviously don't know how the social programs in this country work.

Lastly, I'd like to apologize as a normal American who loves my country and what is was founded on to the people who have to read Inkswitch bull. But it is his right to sound like a Fascist Xenophobic Nationalist. Not all Americans are like him, most know a few things about History politics and government and aren't Limbaugh or Hannity Ditto Heads.


Date
Subject
Author
1.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
7.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
 bs
8.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
  Re: bs
17.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
   Re: bs
30.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
    Re: bs
86.
Jan 2, 2004Jan 2 2004
   Re: bs
88.
Jan 2, 2004Jan 2 2004
    Re: bs
11.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
12.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
15.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
18.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
20.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
21.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
22.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
    No subject
33.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
14.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
  Re: bs
16.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
19.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
24.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
35.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
2.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
3.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
5.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
6.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
4.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
9.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
10.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
13.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
23.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
27.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
34.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
36.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
25.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
28.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
29.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
31.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
32.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
26.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
37.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
39.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
 duh
38.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
40.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
41.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
42.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
49.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
71.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
79.
Jan 2, 2004Jan 2 2004
80.
Jan 2, 2004Jan 2 2004
43.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
44.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
68.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
45.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
46.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
47.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
53.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
54.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
58.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
61.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
55.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
48.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
50.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
51.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
56.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
59.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
57.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
60.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
62.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
63.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
66.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
73.
Jan 2, 2004Jan 2 2004
82.
Jan 2, 2004Jan 2 2004
89.
Jan 2, 2004Jan 2 2004
102.
Jan 3, 2004Jan 3 2004
103.
Jan 3, 2004Jan 3 2004
      Re: Moog Operator
104.
Jan 3, 2004Jan 3 2004
      Re: Moog Operator
106.
Jan 3, 2004Jan 3 2004
       Re: Moog Operator
115.
Jan 5, 2004Jan 5 2004
        Re: Moog Operator
107.
Jan 3, 2004Jan 3 2004
       Re: Moog Operator
121.
Jan 6, 2004Jan 6 2004
       Re: Moog Operator
122.
Jan 6, 2004Jan 6 2004
        Re: Moog Operator
123.
Jan 6, 2004Jan 6 2004
         Re: Moog Operator
125.
Jan 6, 2004Jan 6 2004
          Re: Moog Operator
126.
Jan 6, 2004Jan 6 2004
           Re: Moog Operator
127.
Jan 6, 2004Jan 6 2004
            Re: Moog Operator
128.
Jan 7, 2004Jan 7 2004
           No subject
129.
Jan 7, 2004Jan 7 2004
            Re: No subject
130.
Jan 7, 2004Jan 7 2004
             Re: No subject
131.
Jan 7, 2004Jan 7 2004
              Nukes
134.
Jan 7, 2004Jan 7 2004
               Re: Nukes
136.
Jan 7, 2004Jan 7 2004
                Re: Nukes
137.
Jan 7, 2004Jan 7 2004
                 Re: Nukes
138.
Jan 7, 2004Jan 7 2004
                 Re: Nukes
139.
Jan 7, 2004Jan 7 2004
                 Re: Nukes
140.
Jan 8, 2004Jan 8 2004
                  Re: Nukes
141.
Jan 8, 2004Jan 8 2004
                   Re: Nukes
144.
Jan 8, 2004Jan 8 2004
                    Re: Nukes
146.
Jan 8, 2004Jan 8 2004
                     Re: Nukes
 147.
Jan 8, 2004Jan 8 2004
                     Re: Nukes
148.
Jan 8, 2004Jan 8 2004
                      Re: Nukes
149.
Jan 8, 2004Jan 8 2004
                       Re: Nukes
150.
Jan 8, 2004Jan 8 2004
                      Re: Nukes
151.
Jan 8, 2004Jan 8 2004
                       Re: Nukes
152.
Jan 8, 2004Jan 8 2004
                        Re: Nukes
154.
Jan 8, 2004Jan 8 2004
                         Re: Nukes
155.
Jan 8, 2004Jan 8 2004
                          Re: Nukes
156.
Jan 8, 2004Jan 8 2004
                           Re: Nukes
153.
Jan 8, 2004Jan 8 2004
                       Re: Nukes
157.
Jan 8, 2004Jan 8 2004
                        Re: Nukes
158.
Jan 8, 2004Jan 8 2004
                         Re: Nukes
159.
Jan 8, 2004Jan 8 2004
                          Re: Nukes
160.
Jan 8, 2004Jan 8 2004
                           Re: Nukes
162.
Jan 9, 2004Jan 9 2004
                         Re: Nukes
142.
Jan 8, 2004Jan 8 2004
                   Re: Nukes
143.
Jan 8, 2004Jan 8 2004
                  Re: Nukes
145.
Jan 8, 2004Jan 8 2004
                   Re: Nukes
161.
Jan 9, 2004Jan 9 2004
                    Re: Nukes
132.
Jan 7, 2004Jan 7 2004
           Re: Moog Operator
133.
Jan 7, 2004Jan 7 2004
            Re: Moog Operator
135.
Jan 7, 2004Jan 7 2004
             Re: Moog Operator
124.
Jan 6, 2004Jan 6 2004
       Re: Moog Operator
90.
Jan 2, 2004Jan 2 2004
64.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
65.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
67.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
69.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
85.
Jan 2, 2004Jan 2 2004
70.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
72.
Jan 1, 2004Jan 1 2004
84.
Jan 2, 2004Jan 2 2004
101.
Jan 2, 2004Jan 2 2004
74.
Jan 2, 2004Jan 2 2004
75.
Jan 2, 2004Jan 2 2004
76.
Jan 2, 2004Jan 2 2004
78.
Jan 2, 2004Jan 2 2004
98.
Jan 2, 2004Jan 2 2004
81.
Jan 2, 2004Jan 2 2004
77.
Jan 2, 2004Jan 2 2004
83.
Jan 2, 2004Jan 2 2004
87.
Jan 2, 2004Jan 2 2004
91.
Jan 2, 2004Jan 2 2004
92.
Jan 2, 2004Jan 2 2004
93.
Jan 2, 2004Jan 2 2004
94.
Jan 2, 2004Jan 2 2004
95.
Jan 2, 2004Jan 2 2004
97.
Jan 2, 2004Jan 2 2004
99.
Jan 2, 2004Jan 2 2004
110.
Jan 4, 2004Jan 4 2004
   Re: My 2c
112.
Jan 4, 2004Jan 4 2004
    Re: My 2c
113.
Jan 4, 2004Jan 4 2004
     Re: My 2c
116.
Jan 5, 2004Jan 5 2004
    Re: My 2c
117.
Jan 5, 2004Jan 5 2004
     Re: My 2c
96.
Jan 2, 2004Jan 2 2004
100.
Jan 2, 2004Jan 2 2004
105.
Jan 3, 2004Jan 3 2004
108.
Jan 4, 2004Jan 4 2004
109.
Jan 4, 2004Jan 4 2004
111.
Jan 4, 2004Jan 4 2004
114.
Jan 4, 2004Jan 4 2004
118.
Jan 5, 2004Jan 5 2004
119.
Jan 5, 2004Jan 5 2004
120.
Jan 5, 2004Jan 5 2004