Friar Bijou wrote:
Hey, McGame. Now that I re-read your post there, I'm morbidly curious as to who YOU think qualifies as "worst person in history".
Please, do tell us!
Please, do tell us!
Obama.
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Now we KNOW Hitler was a Righty
Now we KNOW Hitler was a RightyFollow
Obama.
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
Quote:
Hey, McGame. Now that I re-read your post there, I'm morbidly curious as to who YOU think qualifies as "worst person in history".
Please, do tell us!
Please, do tell us!
I can't name any one person who is the worst. Hitler killed many for a goal, although this goal was beneficial to himself and his people, but it was still a reason. He killed these people, but did not torture them generally, unless it was for secret information and similar examples that is still happening today. Any sadistic serial killer who tortures before killing his victim just for fun, is more evil and worse than Hitler in my books.
Around the days of Jesus Christ, the Romans were known to torture many slaves and the lower class. Then there was the Inquisition, and the torture of witches. The authorities and even civilian mobs behind these acts are truly evil.
If you're talking about numbers killed, then yes, Hitler is up there somewhere, but if it's acts if evil and being the 'worst' person, then he's not up there.
Quote:
If you HAVE a notion of evil at all, agressive war upon your neighbors to loot their resources and enslave their people qualifies.
Idiot.
Idiot.
Oh really? It was the honorable thing to do in the old days. It was done by almost every powerful country in the medieval times. During the colonial times, the British and much of the west sailed east and crushed the communities there and made them into colonies for resources. I suppose they were all evil in your books then.
McGame wrote:
Quote:
Hey, McGame. Now that I re-read your post there, I'm morbidly curious as to who YOU think qualifies as "worst person in history".
Please, do tell us!
Please, do tell us!
I can't name any one person who is the worst. Hitler killed many for a goal, although this goal was beneficial to himself and his people, but it was still a reason. He killed these people, but did not torture them generally, unless it was for secret information and similar examples that is still happening today. Any sadistic serial killer who tortures before killing his victim just for fun, is more evil and worse than Hitler in my books.
Around the days of Jesus Christ, the Romans were known to torture many slaves
If you're talking about numbers killed, then yes, Hitler is up there somewhere, but if it's acts if evil and being the 'worst' person, then he's not up there.
Quote:
If you HAVE a notion of evil at all, agressive war upon your neighbors to loot their resources and enslave their people qualifies.
Idiot.
Idiot.
Oh really? It was the honorable thing to do in the old days. It was done by almost every powerful country in the medieval times. During the colonial times, the British and much of the west sailed east and crushed the communities there and made them into colonies for resources. I suppose they were all evil in your books then.
Have you read the horrible things done to the Jews (and others) in the concentration camps of WWII? It wasn't just killing masses of people, it was carrying out not only torture but sick medical experiments as well.
But I do agree with you that it's hard to call Hitler the very worst person in history. Now, I personally don't agree that Hitler's the worst person in history; that is a REALLY broad timeframe, and there have been plenty of really evil people out there. Hitler is especially reviled because he did his deeds recently in terms of history; there are still people alive who were directly affected by what he did. There's nobody alive who still personally remembers what some Roman general or Mongul warlord might have done thousands of years ago, so their deeds are not looked on as badly.
McGame wrote:
Quote:
Hey, McGame. Now that I re-read your post there, I'm morbidly curious as to who YOU think qualifies as "worst person in history".
Please, do tell us!
Please, do tell us!
I can't name any one person who is the worst. Hitler killed many for a goal, although this goal was beneficial to himself and his people, but it was still a reason. He killed these people, but did not torture them generally, unless it was for secret information and similar examples that is still happening today. Any sadistic serial killer who tortures before killing his victim just for fun, is more evil and worse than Hitler in my books.
Around the days of Jesus Christ, the Romans were known to torture many slaves and the lower class. Then there was the Inquisition, and the torture of witches. The authorities and even civilian mobs behind these acts are truly evil.
If you're talking about numbers killed, then yes, Hitler is up there somewhere, but if it's acts if evil and being the 'worst' person, then he's not up there.
The ancient Christians didn't torture for fun either, they had as "valid" a reason as Hitler did.
McGame wrote:
He killed these people, but did not torture them generally, unless it was for secret information and similar examples that is still happening today.
Ah, okay. I get it now. You just don't have the first fucking clue about history.
Read up about life in the concentration camps, then come back and we'll talk. They weren't vacation resorts.
Edited, Sep 7th 2009 5:31pm by Ambrya
McGame wrote:
Quote:
Hey, McGame. Now that I re-read your post there, I'm morbidly curious as to who YOU think qualifies as "worst person in history".
Please, do tell us!
Please, do tell us!
I can't name any one person who is the worst. Hitler killed many for a goal, although this goal was beneficial to himself and his people, but it was still a reason.
His people included Jews and homosexuals and Gypsies and Communists and mentaly/physically deformed/retarded who benefited not at all.
Bijou wrote:
If you HAVE a notion of evil at all, agressive war upon your neighbors to loot their resources and enslave their people qualifies.
Idiot.
Idiot.
McGame wrote:
Oh really? It was the honorable thing to do in the old days.
remorajunbao wrote:
One day I'm going to fly to Canada and open the curtains in your office.
McGame wrote:
Then there was the Inquisition, and the torture of witches.
Evil Evil EVIL Catholics!
Have i missed the bit about McGame being 12 years old?
And also, serious question here...Is history taught in any meaningful way in schools in the US? I know its pretty crap in the UK, but I heard somewhere that its particularly awful in the States.....McGame seems to bear this out.
"If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you're gonna get selfish, ignorant leaders". Carlin.
Quote:
Evil Evil EVIL Catholics!
Have i missed the bit about McGame being 12 years old?
And also, serious question here...Is history taught in any meaningful way in schools in the US? I know its pretty crap in the UK, but I heard somewhere that its particularly awful in the States.....McGame seems to bear this out.
Have i missed the bit about McGame being 12 years old?
And also, serious question here...Is history taught in any meaningful way in schools in the US? I know its pretty crap in the UK, but I heard somewhere that its particularly awful in the States.....McGame seems to bear this out.
Learning history in Wales was great. The biggest historical hero there is Owain Glyndwr, purely because he killed a lot of Englishmen.
It's true, though, the catholic church is pretty ******* twisted.
Edited, Sep 8th 2009 1:01am by Kavekk
paulsol wrote:
And also, serious question here...Is history taught in any meaningful way in schools in the US? I know its pretty crap in the UK, but I heard somewhere that its particularly awful in the States.....McGame seems to bear this out.
It is pretty much not required to speak of in High Schools. In-depth history prior to Uni is a matter of a given student choosing either to take elective classes or self-study. The material is usually there. The ambition is lacking.
I consider myself to have a pretty good grasp of history and I'd say 90% of what I have ever learned of history was from choosing to pick up a book on my own.
Anyway, to answer your question: History is low-priority for primary and secondary schools in the US.
ETA: important word
Edited, Sep 7th 2009 7:03pm by Bijou
remorajunbao wrote:
One day I'm going to fly to Canada and open the curtains in your office.
The majority of the History taught in the US is just US History taught during Elementary school.
World history, outside of that involving the US is elective. I never had a course involving history of the Eastern world. And the only classes I took that covered the middle east were those titled "Rise of Western Civilization". Ones that had an early focus in the middle east, but spread west very quickly, focusing on Europe and then the Americas.
Once in high school, Government was my only real social studies course. And again in College, the only history courses required to take covered the Middle East briefly before heading towards the West again and completely ignoring the Asian countries, Russia and Australia.
World history, outside of that involving the US is elective. I never had a course involving history of the Eastern world. And the only classes I took that covered the middle east were those titled "Rise of Western Civilization". Ones that had an early focus in the middle east, but spread west very quickly, focusing on Europe and then the Americas.
Once in high school, Government was my only real social studies course. And again in College, the only history courses required to take covered the Middle East briefly before heading towards the West again and completely ignoring the Asian countries, Russia and Australia.
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
History was required in my high school. Had history of civilization (Mesopotamia through Renaissance or something) one year, and American history broken up into two years. Can't remember if I had a 4th year of history.
McGame wrote:
Quote:
What on earth does that have to do with the causes of the Second World War and the asinine notion that Hitler only ever wanted peace?
Nothing. I don't buy his point of view either. I have my own view of Hitler, which is quite different from most people.
Hitler was nice to dogs, except if they were Jews, then he'd gas them.
Oh Pat Buchanan.
What is this whole "he's not the worst thing is history" meaning that he's not all that bad sh*t? This is not the oppression olympics. He doesn't have to be worse than Mao or Pol Pot or Stalin. Really. He can be bad all by himself for attempting to orchestrate the genocide of both the Jews and the Roma as well as killing millions of others in a systematic way. God, mother@#%^ing people. It's disconcerting to be in Poland, realizing that in my grandparent's lifetime, there were 2 million Jews. Now there is 3000. Mother@#%^ing. (that includes a later purge in the late 60s. Goddamn Communists)
History wasn't taught extensively but my grandpa was really into WWII, having been there in the European Theater. Later, I majored in modern European history. Really, you can learn alot from picking up a @#%^ing book. McGame represents the intersection of ignorance and right wing bullsh*t coagulating into some *** clot of an idea.
Edited, Sep 7th 2009 9:51pm by Annabella
Turin wrote:
Seriously, what the f*ck nature?
Hey Anna, do you want to argue over whether the Catholic church, and by extension all religion ever, is evil? It'd be fun!
OK, I think the Catholic church is evil because it advocates the ineffectual abstinence only policy in regards to stopping AIDs in Africa, a continent on which it has large areas of influence. Also, nuns? You better believe they're evil.
OK, I think the Catholic church is evil because it advocates the ineffectual abstinence only policy in regards to stopping AIDs in Africa, a continent on which it has large areas of influence. Also, nuns? You better believe they're evil.
Quote:
Ah, okay. I get it now. You just don't have the first ******* clue about history.
Read up about life in the concentration camps, then come back and we'll talk. They weren't vacation resorts.
Read up about life in the concentration camps, then come back and we'll talk. They weren't vacation resorts.
When did I ever imply the concentration camps were fun places? Hitler at first tried to use the able-bodied to work in factories, but decided to kill them later on. What he did not do, was torturing them for the sake of entertainment, which is commonplace in ancient times.
Learn to read, *********
Quote:
The fighting part was the *honorable* bit. The notion that "I'm stronger than you so I can take your stuff" is the evil bit. Or, would it be OK with you if I came to your house with a gun and take your stuff?
Not in this time period, no. In the old days, you would've been encouraged to do it if I were an 'enemy' national.
Quote:
The ancient Christians didn't torture for fun either, they had as "valid" a reason as Hitler did.
The ancient Christians mainly tortured the witches for a confession. There is no way they did not realise that any person, guilty or not, would admit guilt under torture anyway. They already decided the suspects were guilty, and just wanted to torture them till confession to justify their actions. Now that's evil.
Moreover, many people were framed of being witches for personal vendetta or political reasons. Just off the top of my head is Joan of Arc.
Ban this piece of ****.
Kavekk the Ludicrous wrote:
Hey Anna, do you want to argue over whether the Catholic church, and by extension all religion ever, is evil? It'd be fun!
In my limited experience , merely mentioning around here that religion isprobably a bunch of ***** invented in the heads of men and foisted on the unwashed masses as something to cling to whilst they are fucked up the bum by the educated elite, is the quickest way to a sub-default rating that exists.
Other subjects that lead to the same result are pointing out the 1001 good reasons NOT to eat meat, as opposed to the one single good reason to eat it (it tastes nice), or the old favorite of mine, that rising temperatures in the atmosphere, man-made or otherwise, may not be the greatest threat to human existence ever to materialise.
If you value your rating steer well clear.
Having said that, I look forward to an epic thread full of win, if you choose to pursue it.....
Good luck!
"If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you're gonna get selfish, ignorant leaders". Carlin.
Kavekk the Ludicrous wrote:
Ban this piece of sh*t.
I agree. I'm feeling more and more stupider every time I read one of his posts. Osmosis?
He makes varus look like the informed voice of reason.
"If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you're gonna get selfish, ignorant leaders". Carlin.
paulsol wrote:
In my limited experience , merely mentioning around here that religion is probably a bunch of ***** invented in the heads of men and foisted on the unwashed masses as something to cling to whilst they are fucked up the bum by the educated elite, is the quickest way to a sub-default rating that exists.
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If no one debated with me, then I wouldn't post here anymore.
gbaji wrote:
I'm not getting my news from anywhere Joph.
bsphil wrote:
Probably? If there was a shred of objective evidence to show otherwise... or if by probably you mean "in every way that can be known by man to be true".
Yes. Thats what I meant.
I was hedging a bit so as not to get sub-defaulted.....
"If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you're gonna get selfish, ignorant leaders". Carlin.
Kavekk the Ludicrous wrote:
Hey Anna, do you want to argue over whether the Catholic church, and by extension all religion ever, is evil? It'd be fun!
OK, I think the Catholic church is evil because it advocates the ineffectual abstinence only policy in regards to stopping AIDs in Africa, a continent on which it has large areas of influence. Also, nuns? You better believe they're evil.
OK, I think the Catholic church is evil because it advocates the ineffectual abstinence only policy in regards to stopping AIDs in Africa, a continent on which it has large areas of influence. Also, nuns? You better believe they're evil.
No.
Turin wrote:
Seriously, what the f*ck nature?
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Kavekk the Ludicrous wrote:
Hey Anna, do you want to argue over whether the Catholic church, and by extension all religion ever, is evil? It'd be fun!
OK, I think the Catholic church is evil because it advocates the ineffectual abstinence only policy in regards to stopping AIDs in Africa, a continent on which it has large areas of influence. Also, nuns? You better believe they're evil.
OK, I think the Catholic church is evil because it advocates the ineffectual abstinence only policy in regards to stopping AIDs in Africa, a continent on which it has large areas of influence. Also, nuns? You better believe they're evil.
No.
It's a fine talk, but maybe for later. Why not let your antics with the Amish people hijack this thread
Pensive the Ludicrous wrote:
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Kavekk the Ludicrous wrote:
Hey Anna, do you want to argue over whether the Catholic church, and by extension all religion ever, is evil? It'd be fun!
OK, I think the Catholic church is evil because it advocates the ineffectual abstinence only policy in regards to stopping AIDs in Africa, a continent on which it has large areas of influence. Also, nuns? You better believe they're evil.
OK, I think the Catholic church is evil because it advocates the ineffectual abstinence only policy in regards to stopping AIDs in Africa, a continent on which it has large areas of influence. Also, nuns? You better believe they're evil.
No.
It's a fine talk, but maybe for later. Why not let your antics with the Amish people hijack this thread
ENGLISH! I see your sinful buttons. Your vanity will surely send you to hell like it did with Jebediah and his unfortunate and sinful attachment to his curling iron.
That was me all day. Yelling "ENGLISH! Your buttons are sinful!" in the car. It was funny. If you were a little tired... or five... or both.
But dood, I was excited to go to Sonic Burger. I've never been to one. Next up, Red Robin.
Turin wrote:
Seriously, what the f*ck nature?
McGame wrote:
Hitler at first tried to use the able-bodied to work in factories, but decided to kill them later on.
His plan all along was to eliminate the Jews, Communists, trade unions, and other assorted ills on society (in his view).
Read Mein Kampf. It was published in 1925. It's all there.
If you're going to discuss the man's political philosophy you might do others the courtesy of reading it first.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
McGame wrote:
What he did not do, was torturing them for the sake of entertainment, which is commonplace in ancient times.
McGame wrote:
Quote:
The ancient Christians didn't torture for fun either, they had as "valid" a reason as Hitler did.
The ancient Christians mainly tortured the witches for a confession. There is no way they did not realise that any person, guilty or not, would admit guilt under torture anyway. They already decided the suspects were guilty, and just wanted to torture them till confession to justify their actions. Now that's evil.
Moreover, many people were framed of being witches for personal vendetta or political reasons. Just off the top of my head is Joan of Arc.
Still no worse than Hitler's reasons. Nearly functionally identical, in fact. Where are these examples of people torturing "solely for entertainment" that you keep claiming?
Recent Visitors: 279
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (279)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Now we KNOW Hitler was a Righty
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC