Unfortunately, I have to take issue with some of the things you stated as "truth," particularly in the second half of your post. I'm not very familiar with your work against the radio and music industry; however, I am well aware of your work against violent video games and the reputation you have gained as a result of that work.

First of all, I agree with your notion that GTA: Vice City can be regarded as a "cop-killer", since the player is able to kill police officers during the course of the game (it should be noted, however, that it is not mandatory for players to kill police officers in order to finish the game), but I disagree with your stance that it is a "murder-simulation video game." I say this, because your terminology seems to imply that the goal of the game is to kill as many people as possible, to feel some sort of violent high, or that the entire game is targeted towards killing people. This is not the case. It is possible to beat the game without killing anyone, though it is difficult to do so.

Second, I take issue with your attempt to paint yourself as the innocent victim of high-profile, big-name companies like Take-Two, when you are, in fact, innocent of nothing. You have repeatedly claimed that video games have been the cause of, or involved in, a number of lawsuits where police have found no evidence of video game abuse (though you were correct in some), you have authored or co-authored numerous video game censorship laws that were later found to be unconstitutional and did not take effect, and repeatedly used insults and pejorative language to describe your critics and virtually anyone associated with video game promotion. Indeed, you have even been asked by the National Institute on Media and Family to stop using their name in your campaigns, with NIMF President David Walsh saying "Your commentary has included extreme hyperbole and your tactics have included personally attacking individuals for whom I have a great deal of respect."

Along with this, your description of Take-Two as "the company that embedded the "Hot Coffee" porn mod in Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas and sold it to children" is grossly misleading and severely tainted with your own biases. With regards to the "Hot Coffee" mod, you fail to emphasize that it was just that: a mod. The content itself was NOT viewable during normal game play, only being accessible through an individual's conscience decision to change the properties of the game (actions not disclosed by the publisher or creator) to allow the scene, as well as purposefully fulfill the requirements for the scene to be unlocked. In conjunction, the fact that such content was even considered to be in a game defeats your argument that the game was sold to children, as if Take-Two is on some crusade to infect us with degenerative morals. The company sells the game to distributors who then are responsible for selling it to anyone they wish. In any case, the "Hot Coffee" mod would not have been available to children unless it was unlocked for them by their parents or someone with the computer skills to apply the mod and then the know-how to access it.

With regards to the Florida Bar itself, you said that "The Bar seeks to pathologize my Christian faith and public activism because my agenda is not theirs" and that "The Florida Bar has subverted its solemn charge from the Florida Supreme Court to protect the public from unethical lawyers." This is also misleading and fails to mention the terms of many of the Bar's actions against you, specifically that the Bar has filed disbarment proceedings against you because of professional misconduct, including making defamatory statements about numerous judges, disobeying a gag order made by Judge James Moore, along with "separate grievances filed by people claiming that Thompson made false statements and attempted to humiliate, embarrass, harass or intimidate them."

I could go on for a while, mentioning incidents such as the whole Bully fiasco and your "Modest Video Game Proposal", but I think this post is long enough already. I will say that I do agree with your belief that certain video games should not be sold to minors, but I do not believe that harassment, frivolous lawsuits, and unconstitutional laws are the way to go about it. Instead, I think it is more import for parents to be educated about game rating systems such as the ESRB ratings and become more involved in their lives of their children than they currently are, so that there is no reason for such laws to be even considered.

Thanks for your time.