Here is an example of The Onion putting that principle into practice http://www.galacticempiretimes.com/2011/05/09/galaxy/outer-rim/obi-wan-kenobi-is-killed.html

Reminds me of this: Environmentalist Star Wars:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8pnzD6qD4ho

Scarily similar to the jubilant american crowds after the announcement of the rebel leader Osama. Hmmm?

This is absolutely true, slavishmuffin. This is manipulation, and like anything else it can be used for good, or for evil. In absolutely any instance, trying to explain somebody with one word is impossible. Situations are dual in nature so you are missing at least half the story. All you have to do is set up the context and a word or group of words can mean whatever you want it to mean. The power of words is incredible.

And american politicians, in my opinion, are at the top of the game in word usage.

They must be brilliant at scrabble.

I think I explained that like crap. I hope someone else can polish it.

Imagine an invading army attacks your city.

Indiscriminate shelling leaves hundreds dead and homeless.

Occupying force rules the wrecked city ruthlessly, engaging in acts of violence and sadism with population.

Attacks on 'insurgents', done with superior, state-of-the-art technology, cause civilian casualties all the time.

Then one day you remaining family and loved ones are brutally massacred in front of you.

Would you assemble some kludgey weapon and try to avenge them? Would you gang up with others to attack the invading forces? Would you try to inflict some damage to any occupier, showing no mercy, knowing that you aren't likely to survive?

Would you maintain a clear head and contain your anger on the invaders, and not the entire population and government of the invading country?

If you managed to escape to another country, could you stifle your anger, your bitterness, your grief, and be able to avoid being manipulated by others promising 'revenge' and 'retaliation'?

Hard questions.

Check out a movie called "The Violin" (El Violin) - it's a Mexican movie that asks/answers many of these questions.

Actually seen that one, a raw, very hard to watch film but very insightful.

Yeah, definitely.

As to your original questions: I'm in no position to judge someone who is under attack. Like how some escaped slaves would show sheriffs any old papers to prove that they had been freed. The sheriff was illiterate: "I was about to haul you back, boy. Good thing you kept those papers." Sheriff wouldn't question the slave because he didn't want to lose face and reveal to the slave that he couldn't read. Anyway, this action may have been "deceptive" and "illegal" but I'd think we'd agree it was quite legitimate. In fact, everything Hitler did was legal. So if someone is raping my family... I don't think it's unreasonable to physically stop the assault.

Can I even begin to tell you how many times i've said this exact same thing to soooo many people and they're just like "yah i guess lol". Thank you sir, thank you. I now know there are others.

A good question. For me the answer is no. But I would call them people. In a totally hypothetical scenario, I would choose to kill those people who happen to have chosen to be soldiers. They are not my enemy. They are people, and their behaviour is no longer acceptable. Therefore, they should be horizontalised. And I will accept the responsibility of that.

Just replace 'insurgents' with 'rebels' and everything looks different.

We like rebels.

Also if you add person in place of: Republican, Liberal, Conservative, blah blah blah.

Even 'conspiracy theorist' has a predetermined stigma associated with it.

I cringe when people are given titles.

Yeah, replacing a political alliance with 'person', really makes that person look stupid in the context of their remarks.

There was an article in the paper recently about "sex offenders" becoming a growing menace in society. Just to see how it would look, I replaced every occurrence of "sex offender" with "negro" and it looked like an article that would have appeared during the Jim Crow era in Mississippi. They try to make this fear sound rational - but it's all word play. The media hasn't really changed too much.

Although, there was a recent story about Banksy on the front page. And the general sentiment was "hey cool, could it really be him?" As opposed to ten years ago when graffiti was considered solely criminal and related to gangs. The acceptance of Banksy is probably due to the fact that the populous knows that he is white and ultimately an artist. But still... things have changed somewhat.

"sex offenders" becoming a growing menace in society

It is but the stigmatization of people that is happening, instead of blaming who is really at fault, culture.

Yeah, the people that get the book thrown at them by the media are the extremes... the underground world of CEOs, mind control, and sex slaves is so weird to the American public that it can't even be mentioned... but they're the real "sex offenders"

That just occurred to you today??? What the hell did you think the difference between a terrorist or an insurgent and a freedom fighter was? It's the propaganda - or which side of the Television you're on. that is all.

And american politicians, in my opinion, are at the top of the game in word usage.

They must be brilliant at scrabble.

"sex offenders" becoming a growing menace in society

It is but the stigmatization of people that is happening, instead of blaming who is really at fault, culture.

Yeah, the people that get the book thrown at them by the media are the extremes... the underground world of CEOs, mind control, and sex slaves is so weird to the American public that it can't even be mentioned... but they're the real "sex offenders"