StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Article circulating on Facebook. Rather long to quote the whole thing, but in their quest to be funny, they seem to be ignoring some things, like the whole "lead a monastic life of service to the Republic" aspect of Jedi life.

http://www.cracked.com/article_22320_6- ... paths.html

For example, the claim that "The Jedi Have No Official Policies, Regulation, Or Accountability" is simply not true. The Order is accountable to the Senate, and Jedi are accountable to higher-ups in the Order.

"Is there a system in place for when a Jedi starts doing whatever the hell he wants?" This complaint may be legitimate, since Count Dooku was apparently allowed to walk away from the Order without suffering any major consequences. Maybe not, though, since he's the only Jedi ever known to have done that.

"In Episode III, Anakin seems to go against the Code pretty hard when he mutilates and murders Count Dooku." Of course, the only people who know exactly what happened are Anakin and Palpatine. The Order has no reason to think it was anything but a legitimate combat kill.

"The first image we see in the Star Wars timeline is them going to negotiate the trade route. Why are these unelected, erratic sorcerer cops who are barely even accountable to their own Jedi Council in charge of this? Why wasn't a representative of the Senate with them?" Because the Supreme Chancellor of the Senate ordered them to do it. They are the representatives of the Senate.

"In Return Of The Jedi, Luke blew up a 'pleasure barge.'" Dude, it was the personal yacht of a interplanetary crime boss, not the Love Boat.

I found it more annoying than funny.

#4 is like a monument to stupidity.

Firstly, Qui Gon and Obi Wan were sent by the Supreme Chancellor, on behalf of the senate. And they are referred to as ambassadors. So no, they're not elected, they're exercising their function as agents of the Chancellor.

It's in the fucking opening crawl. Why is it people who complain about Phantom Menace being too dumb and childish, can never seem to understand the plot?

Jedi don't like Democracy, it's not like they're willing to die for it. Obi-Wan in fact eventually does die for the Alliance to Restore the Republic.

And you don't need a warrant to arrest Palpatine, you have probable cause that he is the Sith Lord. Which is not just a religious choice or something, but compelling evidence that he's the archtraitor behind a secession, and therefore probable cause for an arrest.

You don't need a warrant to arrest Jeff Davis.

Beyond which they presumably have standing orders to use force to detain leaders of the Confederacy, which Palpatine is.

That said, slow handclap that man. He's noticed the thing the film actually has yoda say, that even if morally necessary, suspending the senate or usurping its authority, 'to a dark place this will lead us.'

If they concentrated on the Jedi Mind Trick/Child Soldier thing, this could have been a really neat article.

And of course there is ample evidence, albeit in the clone wars, that the Jedi do have internal discipline and are subject to trial run by non-Jedi.

Albeit they have the most intimidating courtrooms ever.

Is there any evidence of Jedi in civilian courts?

In TPM, if the Jedi were truly sent just to be ambassadors and negotiate a settlement, they could have stolen a ship, returned to the capitol and advised the senate on what exactly happened, instead of deciding to run a liberation effort on their own.

It is never touched on just how the Jedi order obtains the children that they train. While I'm sure some were voluntarily handed over, I can't imagine that is the case for all of them.

When they go to confront Palpatine, I didn't see any handcuffs or any other such means of restraining him - even if he did agree to come with them peacefully, what were they gonna do then? They know the force can influence people's minds, so putting him in any normal jail/prison was out, and we didn't see any sort of special Jedi holding cells, like Dooku used on Obi Wan.

The Jedi routinely fail to utilize equipment (weapons) which would end encounters quickly - imagine how effective Jedi would be at diffusing situations if they ran around with a lightsaber in one hand and a blaster set to stun in the other.

the old EU explained the "lightsaber only" policy thus, it's intentionally inffecient so that Jedi has to think of non-violent options to resolve conflicts first not just blast everyone and let god sort it out.

In TPM, if the Jedi were truly sent just to be ambassadors and negotiate a settlement, they could have stolen a ship, returned to the capitol and advised the senate on what exactly happened, instead of deciding to run a liberation effort on their own.

When?! before they landed in Naboo, not likely even assuming there was ship at had manual controls any ship that wasn't going exactly where the central computer told it to go would have probably been shot down and that's assuming the Trade Federation doesn't have override they could have used to shut down the ship.

biostem wrote:In TPM, if the Jedi were truly sent just to be ambassadors and negotiate a settlement, they could have stolen a ship, returned to the capitol and advised the senate on what exactly happened, instead of deciding to run a liberation effort on their own.

They... DID.

That's exactly what they did.

The only difference between what you said, is they brought one of the parties to the negotiations out safely, and conveyed her as directly as possible to their employer when they did it. They did so literally immediately (with a detour due to engine damage to Tatooine) after they escaped the attempt on their life, rescued the queen, they brought her to Chancellor Valorum.

They were then duly authorized by legally constituted authority to return with her, but did not fight on her behalf, except against the Sith assailant, who was of course, wanted by the same legally constituted authority.

They even say so in the film:

OBI-WAN : Do you think the Queen's idea will work?
QUI-GON : The Gungans will not easily be swayed, and we cannot use our
power to help her.

Although they offer some pointed advice - they do not draw their weapons again until Darth Maul appears and issues them a very clear challenge to do battle.

When they go to confront Palpatine, I didn't see any handcuffs or any other such means of restraining him - even if he did agree to come with them peacefully, what were they gonna do then?

He's a noble. He can be expected to comport himself honourably. The only scenario in which he'd resist is if he was a Sith Lord (as he was) in which case he can undo handcuffs with a gesture, as we later see him do.

Let's also remember that in some modern nations it's literally shocking to put a senior official in handcuffs before prosecution. Remember the outcry when the French people saw Dominique Strauss-Kahn, a French diplomat handcuffed? Cultural mores vary. In feudal Japan, the idea of binding someone who'd not been convicted was so anathema the police had an entire martial art devoted to restraining people using rope without knots. Let alone manacles. You are assuming the culture in which the Jedi operate is the United States. Even in some developed modern cultures (France), handcuffing an upper class man who's not resisting would be shocking.

When Dooku tries to take the Jedi in on the bridge of the Invisible Hand, he merely demands their swords and their surrender. While restraint is obviously acceptable in some cultures in the galaxy (Geonosis) this comes after conviction in at least one version of the Attack of the Clones script. Before that, they merely deprive Anakin of his weapon.

JANGO FETT moves over to ANAKIN.

JANGO FETT
I'll take that weapon.

ANAKIN hesitates.

DOOKU
You may cause a lot of bloodshed,
my young Jedi, but you will not
escape.

PADMÉ
Anakin...

ANAKIN hands his lightsaber over to JANGO FETT.

INT. GEONOSIS, HIGH AUDIENCE CHAMBER - DAY
ANAKIN and PADME are standing in the centre of what looks like a courtroom. Seated before them in a tall, boxed-off area is POGGLE THE LESSER, Archduke of Geonosis. He is accompanied by his underling, SUN RIT. Off to one side the Separatist Senators PO NUDU, TESSEK, and TOONBUCK TOORA. Next to them are the Commerce Dignitaries, SHU MAI, NUTE GUNRAY, PASSEL ARGENTE, WAT TAMBOR and SAN HILL of the Intergalactic Bank Clan. Along the wall about a HUNDRED GEONOSIANS wait for a verdict.

SUN RIT
You have been charged and found
guilty of Espionage.

POGGLE
Do you have anything to say before
your sentence is carried out?

PADMÉ
You are committing an act of war,
Archduke. I hope you are prepared
for the consequences.

If Palpatine were not a sith lord, prepared to defend himself in honourable combat, then he would not have required binding.

The Jedi routinely fail to utilize equipment (weapons) which would end encounters quickly - imagine how effective Jedi would be at diffusing situations if they ran around with a lightsaber in one hand and a blaster set to stun in the other.

And also body armour. Naturally, the notion that the Jedi are decaying and impractical is a theme in the films.

Of course, the reason is that a sword is a gentleman's weapon, of a more civilized age, and their badge of office. While for their mundane duties as mediators and counselors they do not require other equipment.

we should also remember that the Jedi are not the only "police" force in the Republic (that's from the Clone Wars CGI series and thus still canon), it's most likely that Jedi have more in common with US Marshal or FBI agents then beat cops thus military grade weapons or body armor might not normally be needed. Also waving a blaster around might have the opposite effect instead of diffusing a situation, also it's implied that stun setting isn't "harmless setting" meaning you might still accidently kill someone with it.

Also in the old EU that inefficiency was partly intentional, to force (no pun intended) a Jedi to seek a non-violent solution first instead of blasting everyone and sorting the mess later as I already pointed out, it also adds to the "semi-mythical" status of the Jedi that they seem to use.

Ted C wrote:"Is there a system in place for when a Jedi starts doing whatever the hell he wants?" This complaint may be legitimate, since Count Dooku was apparently allowed to walk away from the Order without suffering any major consequences. Maybe not, though, since he's the only Jedi ever known to have done that.

Also, everyone thought Dooku had simply stopped Jedi-ing at all, not that he'd gone off to found a political coalition to overthrow the Republic. So Dooku isn't a case of the Jedi not having a plan for what happens when a Jedi starts doing what they want. Dooku is a case of the Jedi not having a good system for handling retirees.

Someone at Cracked seems to not like Star Wars very much. They already claimed that ST would beat SW due to transporters that are never used in ST combat. Saying that Jedi are really the evil ones is the smart ass answer, no surprise there. But they are at least partially right, the Jedi were shown to be extremely corrupt and arrogant and primed for a fall. Their biggest problem is that Yoda seems to indicate that the Jedi had no moral reason to help anyone. Their only attachment was to the increasingly corrupt Republic itself.

As a side note, this general idea was something I liked in the Darth Bane trilogy, which somewhat explored the idea that the Jedi were wrong and that there was nothing fundamentally wrong about the Sith. As the primary perspectives are that of Darth Bane and his apprentice Zannah, it has an interesting way of exploring the nature of the Force. By the end of the second book we see once and for all, as Zannah is increasingly corrupted, that the Sith are indeed just as evil as the Jedi claim. I would love to see a standalone film that explored this concept. Especially if it also focused on Bane surviving the destruction of the Sith.

NecronLord wrote:Of course, the reason is that a sword is a gentleman's weapon, of a more civilized age, and their badge of office. While for their mundane duties as mediators and counselors they do not require other equipment.

And once the Clone Wars start, if they ever really need blasters, they have clones for that. It makes more sense for them to focus their decreasing abilities on their lightsabers.

Lord Revan wrote:Also in the old EU that inefficiency was partly intentional, to force (no pun intended) a Jedi to seek a non-violent solution first instead of blasting everyone and sorting the mess later as I already pointed out, it also adds to the "semi-mythical" status of the Jedi that they seem to use.

And it's not like they always kill people with lightsabers. Had Obi-Wan been a police officer, he would have been fully justified in simply shooting Zam as she clearly had a weapon drawn.

Simon_Jester wrote:Also, everyone thought Dooku had simply stopped Jedi-ing at all, not that he'd gone off to found a political coalition to overthrow the Republic. So Dooku isn't a case of the Jedi not having a plan for what happens when a Jedi starts doing what they want. Dooku is a case of the Jedi not having a good system for handling retirees.

And once he started truly going rouge, they did attempt to apprehend him, eventually killing him.

As for a protocol for someone simply leaving, it appears they had such faith in their institution that they never seriously considered the possibility.

I'm inclined to agree with the spirit of #4, for the reasons Publius outlined about 8 years ago. It really was a rolling disaster and gross-overreach on their part, with the Jedi walking right into a trap Palpatine set to give him the rationale he needed to outlaw the Order and hunt them down.

Adamskywalker007 wrote:Someone at Cracked seems to not like Star Wars very much. They already claimed that ST would beat SW due to transporters that are never used in ST combat. Saying that Jedi are really the evil ones is the smart ass answer, no surprise there. But they are at least partially right, the Jedi were shown to be extremely corrupt and arrogant and primed for a fall. Their biggest problem is that Yoda seems to indicate that the Jedi had no moral reason to help anyone. Their only attachment was to the increasingly corrupt Republic itself.

Arrogant, yes; corrupt, no.

It's not that they were being bribed, or used to enforce injustices, so far as I can tell.

It's simply that they were so out of touch that they effectively abdicated responsibility for guarding the Republic.

As for a protocol for someone simply leaving, it appears they had such faith in their institution that they never seriously considered the possibility.

Well, I'm sure they've had individual Jedi who were so injured in the line of duty, or became so infirm with age, that they effectively had to retire. However, it might well be normal for the Jedi to take care of such 'emeritus' Jedi themselves rather than having them leave and go into the wider world.

And it does seem nearly unprecedented for an able-bodied (if elderly) Jedi to leave the Order on his own.

Simon_Jester wrote:

As for a protocol for someone simply leaving, it appears they had such faith in their institution that they never seriously considered the possibility.

Well, I'm sure they've had individual Jedi who were so injured in the line of duty, or became so infirm with age, that they effectively had to retire. However, it might well be normal for the Jedi to take care of such 'emeritus' Jedi themselves rather than having them leave and go into the wider world.

And it does seem nearly unprecedented for an able-bodied (if elderly) Jedi to leave the Order on his own.

it's also possible that Jedi too injured or old for field duty are given duties they can do within the Temple, for example handling the Library or similar.

Guardsman Bass wrote:I'm inclined to agree with the spirit of #4, for the reasons Publius outlined about 8 years ago. It really was a rolling disaster and gross-overreach on their part, with the Jedi walking right into a trap Palpatine set to give him the rationale he needed to outlaw the Order and hunt them down.

Pubulis did excellent work, but that post is now based almost entirely on material that is no longer canon. Even the novelization of ROTS can't be canon given the contradictions with the Clone Wars series. So the idea that Sith would be protected as a religion has no validity and frankly makes little sense. Even worse is the idea that Jedi had no legal authority.

Simon_Jester wrote:It's simply that they were so out of touch that they effectively abdicated responsibility for guarding the Republic.

Out of touch is probably a better description.

As an avowed hater of the prequels, my only real beef with the Jedi is that they readily accepted the services of what were essentially slaves that were created and indoctrinated to obey them. I'd have appreciated an extra scene in which Yoda paid the Kaminoans and then told the assembled clones that they were now free...but that he would welcome volunteers to serve the Republic.

That would have gone a long way towards redeeming the Jedi in a lot of peoples' minds.

Adamskywalker007 wrote:

Guardsman Bass wrote:I'm inclined to agree with the spirit of #4, for the reasons Publius outlined about 8 years ago. It really was a rolling disaster and gross-overreach on their part, with the Jedi walking right into a trap Palpatine set to give him the rationale he needed to outlaw the Order and hunt them down.

Pubulis did excellent work, but that post is now based almost entirely on material that is no longer canon. Even the novelization of ROTS can't be canon given the contradictions with the Clone Wars series. So the idea that Sith would be protected as a religion has no validity and frankly makes little sense. Even worse is the idea that Jedi had no legal authority.

Even within the Legends continuity, he makes a key assumption about republic law that is refutable within the context of the movie.

He assumes that the Chancellor is legally immune to arrest like many modern heads of state. There is no evidence of that. There is filmatic evidence to the contrary: Windu's eventual (and unquestionably illegal) decision to murder the Chancellor is not based on 'we cannot take him to court because of his immunity to arrest' but 'he has control of the senate and the courts.' If the Chancellor had immunity to prosecution, a reasonable person would mention that as the most significant factor.

Absent other evidence, that makes it probable that the Jedi can in fact bring the Supreme Chancellor to a court; that, combined with the probable cause Publius ignores (The Jedi in Labyrinth of Evil know that a resident of 500 Republica is the Sith Lord responsible for the Secession, the War and a laundry list of other crimes, even if there were other sith priests in temples somewhere, they have a body of forensic evidence in LoE that this one is the Archtraitor.)

In many countries it is legal for a law officer to make an arrest and then press charges later, nor are they obligated to explain their reasons for the arrest at the time of the arrest, that's not how police powers work, certainly not everywhere.

It is entirely reasonable to think that the aforementioned probable cause would allow them to legally make an arrest, obtain a warrant for a complete search of his chambers, which would find sundry artifacts, documents and communications gear that would allow a case to be constructed, and charges to be pressed in whatever deadline the Republic might have.

IF he had been brought before an unbiased court, using this evidence, conviction is certain.

If after striking Windu's hand off to prevent him murdering Palpatine, Anakin had proceeded to arrest Palpatine [the legally correct course of action], there is no reason to think this would be illegal, and every reason to think it would be (though it would probably not actually result in conviction, due to corruption).

The dialogue of the film very clearly suggests that the Jedi can bring the Chancellor to a court legally. Anakin believes this. Windu believes this.

Of course, the article's point is whether they're heroic, not if they're correct in law. Robin Hood was incorrect in Norman law, but generally regarded as heroic. Likewise, illegally assassinating Palpatine, a man personally responsible for millions or billions of innocent deaths, the kidnap of and experimentation upon children, murder, ethnic cleansing, and sundry other crimes, and who would go on to destroy billions more innocent people, is illegal but entirely moral under any utilitarian frame of morals and many, many other moral schemes, in fact almost any that avoid complete nonviolence.

And people who advocate complete nonviolence probably don't expect to find the heroes of something called Star Wars to be morally palatable.

Galvatron wrote:As an avowed hater of the prequels, my only real beef with the Jedi is that they readily accepted the services of what were essentially slaves that were created and indoctrinated to obey them. I'd have appreciated an extra scene in which Yoda paid the Kaminoans and then told the assembled clones that they were now free...but that he would welcome volunteers to serve the Republic.

That would have gone a long way towards redeeming the Jedi in a lot of peoples' minds.

You are wholly correct, in my view.

NecronLord wrote:

Galvatron wrote:As an avowed hater of the prequels, my only real beef with the Jedi is that they readily accepted the services of what were essentially slaves that were created and indoctrinated to obey them. I'd have appreciated an extra scene in which Yoda paid the Kaminoans and then told the assembled clones that they were now free...but that he would welcome volunteers to serve the Republic.

That would have gone a long way towards redeeming the Jedi in a lot of peoples' minds.

You are wholly correct, in my view.

True. Although the point was indeed that the Jedi were not so good and pure as they thought they were. And it did bite them in the ass later on.

NecronLord wrote:

Galvatron wrote:As an avowed hater of the prequels, my only real beef with the Jedi is that they readily accepted the services of what were essentially slaves that were created and indoctrinated to obey them. I'd have appreciated an extra scene in which Yoda paid the Kaminoans and then told the assembled clones that they were now free...but that he would welcome volunteers to serve the Republic.

That would have gone a long way towards redeeming the Jedi in a lot of peoples' minds.

You are wholly correct, in my view.

This doesn't really fit with Clone Wars, but given Order 66, my feeling with Clones was that they would follow every order to the letter regardless of the context. They were the ultimate soldier, bred and trained for loyalty? Asking for volunteers would be pointless.

As for why the Jedi never considered it, it makes sense given that they were essentially in the same position, raised from birth to serve. Apart from Anakin, no Jedi volunteered. Though they were free to leave, one leaving as Dooku did became galactic news.

As for Jedi morality, Yoda had a serious problem revolving around the fact that he had lived so long. He didn't see death in the same context as most others. His advice to Anakin was to learn to let go rather than to help.

Adamskywalker007 wrote:This doesn't really fit with Clone Wars, but given Order 66, my feeling with Clones was that they would follow every order to the letter regardless of the context. They were the ultimate soldier, bred and trained for loyalty? Asking for volunteers would be pointless.

Giving them the choice and making the distinction that they would serve the Republic and not the Jedi is the point. Sometimes, the gesture is what counts.

This is a bit of a tangent.

Before the Phantom Menace did any of you think the Jedi was actually so embroiled in politics and other facets of the republic?

I personally thought the Jedi would be reclusive living in temples on distant worlds spending their days meditating and contemplating the force, Kind of like Shaolin monks, They were would be regarded with high esteem by the outside world but I thought the guardians of the galaxy was an honorary thing and the republic would have an actual Army/Navy to fight wars rather than relying on Jedi.

I always envisioned the Jedi as being perpetually scattered throughout the galaxy and getting things done with nothing but the Force and their lightsaber. No temple, no council, no political clout, etc.

Based on ANH, I assumed that many of them enlisted during the Clone Wars, but I imagined Kenobi himself ascended to the rank of general over time due more to his exemplary service record, and not simply because he was a Jedi Knight.

The Jedi that we got were far too...privileged.

Anacronian wrote:This is a bit of a tangent.

Before the Phantom Menace did any of you think the Jedi was actually so embroiled in politics and other facets of the republic?

I personally thought the Jedi would be reclusive living in temples on distant worlds spending their days meditating and contemplating the force, Kind of like Shaolin monks, They were would be regarded with high esteem by the outside world but I thought the guardians of the galaxy was an honorary thing and the republic would have an actual Army/Navy to fight wars rather than relying on Jedi.

I actually did.

Based particularly on Joruus C'Boath's talk about administering justice, arbitrating and things.

NecronLord wrote:

Anacronian wrote:This is a bit of a tangent.

Before the Phantom Menace did any of you think the Jedi was actually so embroiled in politics and other facets of the republic?

I personally thought the Jedi would be reclusive living in temples on distant worlds spending their days meditating and contemplating the force, Kind of like Shaolin monks, They were would be regarded with high esteem by the outside world but I thought the guardians of the galaxy was an honorary thing and the republic would have an actual Army/Navy to fight wars rather than relying on Jedi.

I actually did.

Based particularly on Joruus C'Boath's talk about administering justice, arbitrating and things.

Well I never read any of the books before Phantom Menace so perhaps that's the reason it seemed so odd to me.