The Source

I see where you are going, and I do have to agree with you. I'm not an Avellone fan in any way, but I think he tried something that Star Wars needed. Star Wars really needed a shot in the arm. I'm not saying he was successful, but I do like the idea of trying something new. “KotOR I” was an awesome reminder of why I like Star Wars. When they decided to do a sequel, I was a little disappointed. “KotOR II” should have been a standalone story, for its predecessor gave a true Star Wars send off for Revan. "KotOR III" should be a stanalone. If doing a MMORPG will make this happen, then I will be one to settle for "KotOR I" as an ending to Revan.

I don't think anyone in this century should apologize for someone else’s past. Unless they were involved with slavery themselves, I don't think that making an apology is rational. What people should apologize for is not changing. We live in a very different world today, which reverse discrimination has started to become a common occurrence. How we move forward is important. Discrimination is discrimination. Regardless about whom is carrying out the act, your ethnic background does not excuse anyone from being an exception to the discrimination laws. Within today's United States social structure, people of minority are becoming discriminative towards Europeans. Unless we do something else to cool the engine down, we could be looking at a serious issue in the future.

I had good intentions for this thread, but it has moved into another dimension. Before anyone says something that may become hateful, I would like to ask for this thread to be closed. This is not a bashing thread.

Actually, I came to a revelation, and then I made it public. --Removed flame-bait. - Aye my me, Strawberry Sith.

Are you sure about that? Or, did you translate the statement that way, for you personally believe (subjective) that is what I said? Keep in mind that this is not a thread to revisit any one event. We are talking about the interpretation of truth, and the subjectivity of how people preceive truth.

I'm writting fast, so forgive my slip-ups.

Actually, that is what is intended. You just clearified my statements. Correct. What you need to look at is how I write, and not what you believe you see. I used the word 'if'. Correct? If someone were to look at all of my arugements, reading every word and grammical statement, I have been missread on many ocassions. Sometimes the most simplest word has meaning, but when statements are taken out of contents the meaning changes. Example Only: When I spoke in the Restoration thread, I made the statement that modding is ilegal. Instead of reading the statement as is, people automatically believed that I said, "Team-Gizka is doing something illegal." I didn't. Different world isn't it?

First, thanks for your challange EW. As long as we keep it civilized, I'm willing to have this conversation with you. Truth is in the eye of the beholder. Your sense of what is to be true is different from what others believe to be true. Correct? History books are written by the victor, and as you know they are based upon truth that is both biased and subjective. I have never once said that, "You should believe me, or my truth is absolute in all ways." I'm only human. I may make an effort to discredit something, but that does not mean what I said is not wrong. Salem Whitch trials are an example of a collective gone wrong. Slip-ups are subjective. Right? Could we get the title expanded?

Being correct about something is subjective. Thoughout several historical world events, there is evidence that some powerful collectives can be absolutely wrong. Challanging such collectives is healthy, and it is the responsibility of existentialists to allways challange the collective. You can only speak for yourself, and you nor I can speak for other individual's thoughts.

Split from Slip-Ups Thread I'm someone who challanges all types of authorities, and those who ride on the backs of other's hardwork. Even though I may make a dramatic a#$ out of myself, I do it in a manner in which challanges the way people think. I'm an illogical individual made up with complex theologies, which battle untirelessly to find a sense of order. When someone is worshiped (Obama & Team-Gizka), I will challange their sense of reponsibility and influence. I do not follow the herd blindly, nor do I give into the collective. If making a forums a@# out of myself provides thinking, I'm willing to go down with my personal and illogical beliefs. We are human. We are existential. I'm willing to be hated, so that others can have a voice. It is logical. I'm not affraid of infractions, but I will challange the system in which uses them.

Join In: Promoting LucasForums Tolerance Over the past several weeks, I have observed an interesting phenomenon. When reading through several of the threads, I have seen some bullying in the forums. Normally the bullying is done by one individual, but for some reason a cliché of individuals are doing the bullying. During one of the discussion in the forums, one individual had an alternative opinion. As a result of not sharing the same perspective with the group, the cliché of bullies raced to obliterate the individual's contributions. Each individual involved in the cliché ignore the details of what is being posted. If the individual has one element wrong, the group quickly discredits the individual's opinion. Since the scope of the bullying is of a good sized group, I don't think we would do justice in pointing them out. Instead of playing the blame game, or causing more forum-bashing, I'm asking you all to sign this thread as a push towards forum tolerance. It’s okay to have an opinion. Even though the individual may get the facts wrong, they should not be attacked by any cliché of individuals. Tolerance about other's opinions is paramount. Opinions do not need facts to be true to the individual. Forums are made for debating, sharing, and fun. No one should have to apologize or feel pressured for having an unpopular opinion. Keep it real, keep it fun, and promote tolerance.

Thats why its called an opinion. If NASA did find life on Mars (or other locations), we will never have the clearance to obtain such knowledge. Area 51 is an example of myth meets technological advancement. Most of what we call ufos are man made, or our governments allready knows what is going on. I think there is a level of moral responsibility to keep information about alien life away from the public. If we awoke to the news that life exists elsewhere, some people will react in an extremely violent or religious manner. People will be scared from not understanding the unknown. Some extremists will arm themselves, for they believe a foreign invader is a threat. On the flip side of the coin, some people will worship the alien new comers. I think it would be nieve to jump to both conclusions, but the majority of the world will not see aliens from a neutral perspective. During Ronald Regan's presidental terms, he made an interesting comment. Even though he was refering to breaking down borders, he did shead some light on how people may behave. "If we were to be threatened by an alien invader, the borders we have in place would crumble. We would be united." <--- Loosely quoted. Our government would react militarily to prevent first contact with the general pupulation. Why? Anything that threatens the day to day activity of normality will cause psychological harm. I'm willing to bet that some countries would fire a missle upon first contact. Since there are countries bent on maintaining control, they will try to eliminate anything that will change social psychology.

While trying to keep on subject, I thought I would share some stuff I learned. About seven years ago, I was searching online for UFO stuff. After I made my way to the NASA and SETI site, I bumped into a few interesting articles. Unfortunately, I don’t remember the exact online addresses. Since it had been a long time, I didn’t think about bookmaking them. As a result of the article’s content, the information has been burned into my mind for years. Every time I read an article about aliens, signals, and ufos, I cannot help but think back to the articles I found. Opinion and Article Facts (Mixed): 1 – NASA and SETI signed a nondisclosure agreement with the government. If they ever find evidence of life, (signals, images, etc…), they cannot in any way share that information. Big deal right? Well, the agreement was sign into law in the 1980s. 2 – SETI received a signal during the very first attempt. After SETI caught the signal, the government jumped to prevent public disclosure. Before the government could do anything about it, SETI already had released the signal to colleges and universities. They call it the WOW signal. 3 – When people ask the government the big question, “Was there an unidentified flying saucer on March 4th.” The government will say, “No.” Why? Since they know what is in the sky, they can answer the question without revealing any answers. Where am I going with this? While visiting the NASA site four years ago, there was an article about how the government dodges the big question. Get it? 4 – Another interesting article I read was about evidence. Every single piece of public evidence of UFOs is blurry or tiny. There is not a single piece of definitive evidence to prove the existence of UFOs. Why have we not been able to catch UFOs on camera? If they do visit Earth in any fashion, they will stay in high orbit away from public viewing. We will never know the truth in our lifetime.

Wow. What a movie. If you are a fan of the novels, you will definitely love this movie to death. When watching the film, all I could think about is the "Knights Fall, Ending, and Quest" comic-book series. I did think the writters were a little too serious, but it all fits nicely together in perfect harmony. I loved how the movie makes you feel, "Hey! I thought this was a Batman movie." Even though Rachel's actor was recasted, I think they chose someone better than Katey Homes. I agree with those who say that Bale's acting was overshadowed. If this is part two to a trilogy, I'm hoping that they explore the real Bane story.

JFK and Martin Luther King did some great things. Keep in mind that Hitler and Jimmy Jones shared their philosophy of a 'Utopian Society', and they took it into the wrong direction. Hitler and Jones promised a world of peace, prosperity, and salvation. Each one sold the philosophy of change, hope, and Eden. After amassing thousands of followers, Hitler and Jones revealed their definition of such slogan and words. Its all about definition.