I saw this movie StarWars

LillSnopp · Post by **LillSnopp** » Thu May 19, 2005 5:49 pm

I just saw this movie StarWars.

And its really bad. I mean, first episode was real garbage, some sort of joke movie (i suspect the directors didnt take it seriously), and then the second one seemed more serious, but poor acting.

And now this, its suppose to be the last one if i understood it correctly, and i rarely see such poor acting in a movie. Seriously. Perhaps the actors are new to all of this, i saw a negro which i also seen in Pulp Fiction (one of the few i recognized), and he is pretty good in that movie (Pulp Fiction that is). But in this one, cheeezes, i say.

In any case, perhaps you guys seen this to? I remember the original movies, they where pretty good, but what is this ?

foshizzle · Post by **foshizzle** » Sun May 22, 2005 12:43 am

I can honestly say I've never met someone with such a high opinion of himself, and such a low opinion of everyone with different opinions.

Who made you an Illuminati?

Is your enlightenment self-proclaimed?

Who has the authority to recognize enlightenment?

Either way, only an Illuminati can see enlightenment for what it is, correct? So what if I were to say I was enlightened and you are ignorant? Who are you to say I'm not? Obviously, since I'm enlightened and you are not, you cannot understand such enlightenment. You are blessed with my very presence.

Enlightenment is self-proclaimed (not necessarily by you, but by another Illuminati).

No matter what you say, it doesn't matter. I know for a fact that I'm right, because I'm enlightened.

Corvus · Post by **Corvus** » Sun May 22, 2005 1:14 am

In episode two Count Duku(sp?) escaped with the plans for a weapon that can destroy whole planets. Later on in the series, Luke Skywalker's home planet is destroyed. I would call that a brutal dictatorship.
I dont know what dictatorship has to do with destroying planets, i think you have a huge problem with seeing different relevances here. Its like me complaining about a Cat, because people in Africa died.. its like. .Erhm, what?

What indeed. The weapon for destroying whole planets is owned by a dictatorship - you know, for the purposes of dictating what is expected from the people of said planets. How is this not brutal or dictatorial?

I really don't understand this desire for stability. If it is important enough that millions can be killed to achieve it, why not just kill everyone? Why do the survivors have any value at all, and why should they be accommodated with "stability'?

Guilty are those who use the word "whom" wrongly.
Indeed

Does this mean you'll stop doing it?

foshizzle · Post by **foshizzle** » Sun May 22, 2005 1:44 am

Oh! And we can tattoo a barcode onto everyone's arm! That will allow for easier documentation of the units. Err...people.

LillSnopp · Post by **LillSnopp** » Sun May 22, 2005 2:05 am

What indeed. The weapon for destroying whole planets is owned by a dictatorship - you know, for the purposes of dictating what is expected from the people of said planets. How is this not brutal or dictatorial?

Really? I thought he had a weapon to destroy planets, so he could.. erh. Destroy planets.

I really don't understand this desire for stability. If it is important enough that millions can be killed to achieve it, why not just kill everyone? Why do the survivors have any value at all, and why should they be accommodated with "stability'?

Perhaps this is why you would be included in the "millions" eh? You are one of does that rather destroy humankind, then save it. The termination of the weak is vital to the survival of the species. If we have no people saying things like you do ("why not just kill everyone?"), everything would be good. But i doubt you would see this.

LillSnopp · Post by **LillSnopp** » Sun May 22, 2005 2:06 am

foshizzle wrote:Oh! And we can tattoo a barcode onto everyone's arm! That will allow for easier documentation of the units. Err...people.

Indeed, sounds reasonable. In Sweden we have something called Personal Identity Number. Thats why we can have such superior statistics and similar compared to the U.S.

I heard that they want to bring in a ID number thingy-similar in the U.S, But for some reasons people dont want this, very strange. I assumed only criminals would not like this(?).

Corvus · Post by **Corvus** » Sun May 22, 2005 2:23 am

LillSnopp wrote:
I really don't understand this desire for stability. If it is important enough that millions can be killed to achieve it, why not just kill everyone? Why do the survivors have any value at all, and why should they be accommodated with "stability'?
Perhaps this is why you would be included in the "millions" eh? You are one of does that rather destroy humankind, then save it. The termination of the weak is vital to the survival of the species. If we have no people saying things like you do ("why not just kill everyone?"), everything would be good.

I just ask the good questions and occasionally nitpick people's grammar but if I'm weak enough to require termination, then I'm dreadfully sorry.

You didn't really answer my question, though. If the termination of the weak is vital to the survival of the species, why is the survival of the species important? By what principles do you come to the conclusion that the species is important and needs to be saved from "weak" people? If no one has any rights and you're going to be killing all the weak people I'd hope you have a good reason for saving the "strong".

foshizzle · Post by **foshizzle** » Sun May 22, 2005 2:28 am

Who made you an Illuminati?

Is your enlightenment self-proclaimed?

Who has the authority to recognize enlightenment?

Either way, only an Illuminati can see enlightenment for what it is, correct? So what if I were to say I was enlightened and you are ignorant? Who are you to say I'm not? Obviously, since I'm enlightened and you are not, you cannot understand such enlightenment. You are blessed with my very presence.

Enlightenment is self-proclaimed (not necessarily by you, but by another Illuminati).

No matter what you say, it doesn't matter. I know for a fact that I'm right, because I'm enlightened.

I also asked this previously, and was incredibly curious as to your response.

LillSnopp · Post by **LillSnopp** » Sun May 22, 2005 2:28 am

You didn't really answer my question, though. If the termination of the weak is vital to the survival of the species, why is the survival of the species important? By what principles do you come to the conclusion that the species is important and needs to be saved from "weak" people? If no one has any rights and you're going to be killing all the weak people I'd hope you have a good reason for saving the "strong".

It is important for me to make sure humankind survive. I care for humanity, you may not (clearly not). Thats the difference, i am prepared to make a huge sacrifice to make sure the human race existence continues. Your prepared to do nothing, as you think its to costly for yourself. Whiles i lack this egocentric view, it also gives me the ability to want to save the race.

foshizzle · Post by **foshizzle** » Sun May 22, 2005 2:35 am

It is important for me to make sure humankind survive. I care for humanity, you may not (clearly not). Thats the difference, i am prepared to make a huge sacrifice to make sure the human race existence continues. Your prepared to do nothing, as you think its to costly for yourself. Whiles i lack this egocentric view, it also gives me the ability to want to save the race.

Why is it important to you that humankind survive? Humans are obviously not valuable enough to preserve as many as possible.

You are prepared to make what sacrifice? Are you willing to die?

You're willing to kill everyone that believes differently from you, so you and people with your beliefs can rule the planet in a perverted 'peace'?

I feel so selfish...

Oh, and can you respond to this? I /really/ want to see how you do so.

I wish i was willing to kill everyone that didn't share my opinions. Too bad, i'm so focused on myself that I want people to live

.

Who made you an Illuminati?

Is your enlightenment self-proclaimed?

Who has the authority to recognize enlightenment?

Either way, only an Illuminati can see enlightenment for what it is, correct? So what if I were to say I was enlightened and you are ignorant? Who are you to say I'm not? Obviously, since I'm enlightened and you are not, you cannot understand such enlightenment. You are blessed with my very presence.

Enlightenment is self-proclaimed (not necessarily by you, but by another Illuminati).

No matter what you say, it doesn't matter. I know for a fact that I'm right, because I'm enlightened.

Corvus · Post by **Corvus** » Sun May 22, 2005 2:37 am

LillSnopp wrote:
You didn't really answer my question, though. If the termination of the weak is vital to the survival of the species, why is the survival of the species important? By what principles do you come to the conclusion that the species is important and needs to be saved from "weak" people? If no one has any rights and you're going to be killing all the weak people I'd hope you have a good reason for saving the "strong".
It is important for me to make sure humankind survive. I care for humanity, you may not (clearly not). Thats the difference, i am prepared to make a huge sacrifice to make sure the human race existence continues.

You're not making any sacrifices, you're describing how it would be nice if you could kill everyone who doesn't agree with you; not for the purposes of "saving humankind", but realising your ideal of what you want humankind to be.

That doesn't suggest to me that you care about humankind. It suggests to me that you want it to be something else.

Your prepared to do nothing, as you think its to costly for yourself. Whiles i lack this egocentric view, it also gives me the ability to want to save the race.

You want humankind to conform to your own ideal. Why? "It is important for me," you say. That's the extent of your "reason."