Maybe, if you also believe in angels
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-0h50...

The primary message that this article and Lucas got correct was from Princess Padme, "So this is how liberty dies ... to thunderous applause?"

Remember, a cancerous cell was once a healthy one that has been corrupted. It retains enough of its original identity to fool the immune system so it can do its destructive work without detection or interference. The simile to those in our culture that would seek to destroy us is too accurate to be coincidental.

I'm with you Professor. Excellent points. Now is the time when those of us who understand the reality of what is happening must prepare and act to prevent that cancer from killing us.

Thanks for pointing out these distinctions. Language and context have become very corrupted and confused in our society.

Trump has said some dangerous things. He wants to make our military bigger and stronger. As if it isn't already TOO big and strong?!
Second, he has often said. "I had no choice. I had to do it." That shows a man that is not open to reason, debate, and alternative approaches.

Maybe, there never were any such thing as an honest banker. Sometimes I think I've been cast in a horror movie against my will.

You left out Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt (Assistant Secretary of the Navy under McKinley), Bush I, and Bush II.
One con-man after another.

War Mongers rarely ever announce their intentions until they are either in power or are assured of power. Although, I could easily see certain dictator tendencies in his demeanor and speeches.

After so much propaganda, the truth is very hard to accept. It's either accept the truth or accept slavery.
I don't think the 'honest banker' was reviled into extinction. It's power that corrupts.

What should be and what is, is not the same.
The problem with honest bankers is they have been reviled out of existence. When it comes to money, hardly anyone wants to hear the truth.

"What if they threw a war, and nobody came?"
What, bankers are extinct?

Excellent article:
Congress has allowed Obama to create a path to totalitarianism that will, no doubt, be followed by his successor no matter who he or she may be. As such they are facilitators of the destruction of the republic. Ben Franklin's answer when asked "What have you given us?", "A republic, if you can keep it". Rings as true today as it did over 200 years ago. Franklin was being optimistic when he predicted that the republic might last 100 years. It is now over 235 years but the end is in sight. Do we have the insight and courage to protect what we have or will we join the long history of civilizations that rose and fell. The decay is from within. It is as if the immune system of our civilization has turned against its host. When we die it will be from a cancer not an assault.

The writer failed to mention how FDR got the USA into WW2 since he knew about the attack on Pearl Harbor 11 months in advance and could have stopped it well before December 7th. Wars, without exception as far as I can tell are ever motivated by power players for reasons other that those that would benefit humanity.
"What if they threw a war, and nobody came?"

Trump?? Really?? With all his faults, he never impressed me as a war monger. There are others running that are brought to mind, though.

Killing an innocent person on accident is not called manslaughter. It depends on a host of factors such as the nature of the accident, whether it was reasonably foreseeable at the time, etc. Similarly, killing an innocent person on purpose is not called murder for the same reasons. Self-defense, for example, is killing someone deliberately but is not murder. A doctor who prescribes a drug that ends up killing an individual due to an adverse reaction that could not have been foreseen at the time has killed someone accidentally but it is not manslaughter. Similarly, if one shows reckless disregard for human life, such as shooting a gun into the air in a crowded area (such as is done in some countries to celebrate the New Year) and having the bullet come down and kill someone was certainly not intentional murder but it can be considered murder nonetheless (in the second or third degree).

In addition, the law does objectively define self-defense and what the US does when it attacks other countries is not considered self-defense. It is considered to be retaliatory in nature and only the state has the legal right to conduct retaliatory attacks and only under the guise of war.

Thus, part of the problem for "terrorists" (and the American revolutionaries were considered terrorists from the British perspective) is that we have never explicitly recognized their right to attack military targets. I proposed that they be allowed to do so without fear of judicial punishment (but they still would be subject to military response) in a paper I authored three months before 9/11 occurred. I classified attacks on government and military installations carried out while attempting to limit damage to other targets as best as one could to be an act of war, not terrorism, and considered it legitimate. As such, I considered the bombing of the Marine barracks in Lebanon and the sinking of USS Cole to be "legitimate" actions of war that should not have criminal repercussions but actions undertaken on 9/11 would definitely not fit this definition since two of the attacks were against civilian targets and the third (the attack on the Pentagon), while ordinarily a legitimate target, was carried out with a civilian airliner.

Part of the problem is that the US wants to punish everyone who carries out attacks on it regardless of intent as being a crime, which basically means that we should not look at the American Revolutionaries as patriots but rather as traitors. I do not support that view. There are legitimate mechanisms that can be objectively defined for waging war against the state and we need to stop thinking that automatically an attack on America interests, whatever they might be (including military targets), is, by definition, an attack on innocents, such as is currently the theory that is being used by the American government.

Apparently for many, there is at least far too much ignorance on the question!
Who was it who said the story of civilization is the battle of the individual against the state? Doesn't matter what 'side' or cause the State may be on at any particular time.

Do you think this article gets the message right, Jim? Or are you referring to another message?

It's been 4 years since I saw it, but SUICIDE is the tragic leading or dominant cause of death for many demography in the US. More dramatically with our military vets and enlisted people. If terrorists were killing 20+ people/day, wouldn't we hear more about it?
If I can find an active link again to the stats I'll post gem here. They were very sobering and depressing. The point is that most of our suffering is self-imposed. That goes for individuals as well as our nation.

Radical Islam is radicalizing the United States. Radical conservatism (i.e. Trump) and radical liberalism (i.e. Sanders) are both developing and growing together in the America's political sphere.

Luke Skywalker was radicalized after his family was killed in a raid. He joined an ancient sect and participated in an attack that killed countless people... Which begs the question: was he right?

I will answer the question with another question: What constitutes self-defense and what constitutes an initial attack? Objective law should define this distinction. But it is clear that the error made by terrorists is that killing innocent people does not comprise proper retribution. Further, killing an innocent person on accident is not equivalent to killing an innocent person on purpose. One is called manslaughter, the other, murder.

The US is, no doubt, responsible for the deaths of some innocent people. At the same time, it is not self defense to kill innocent civilians, even in response to the deaths of innocent people. It is not self defense to encourage martyrdom (and I distinguish this from service) among young people. It is not self defense to use women and children as suicide bombers in order to "end American arrogance" as has been claimed. These acts are initiations of the use of physical force against individuals who are innocent.

It is a shame that the message of Star Wars has gone unlearned.

This site has interesting stats on current causes of death and life expectancy:
http://www.worldlifeexpectancy.com/us...