Mazzy Posted January 15, 2008 Report Share Posted January 15, 2008 Yes? evil :twisted: . A topic that has always fascinated me. What pushes a man or a woman to become ?evil?? Actually what does it mean to be evil? So here?s a simple question to get a forum started: Who was the most evil person that ever lived? A few ground rule to avoid this turning into the usual TF nonsense crap: 1- Can?t name anybody else on TF 2- Can?t name your in laws 3- Can?t name your ex 4- No boring monologue 5- Try sticking to the topic for a change Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CiaranM Posted January 15, 2008 Report Share Posted January 15, 2008 geeeezzzz .... well in relatively recent times it's hard to choose between 1. Hitler 2. Mao 3. Pol Pot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eagle Posted January 15, 2008 Report Share Posted January 15, 2008 Evil is as Evil does :evil: thanks you Forest ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eagle Posted January 15, 2008 Report Share Posted January 15, 2008 geeeezzzz .... well in relatively recent times it's hard to choose between 1. Hitler 2. Mao 3. Pol Pot or Stalin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mazzy Posted January 15, 2008 Author Report Share Posted January 15, 2008 For discussion sake here is the result of a poll of "evil" people that I found on the net: 1. Hitler 2. George W. Bush 3. Joseph Stalin 4. **** Cheney 5. Pol Pot 6. Osama Bin Laden 7. Chairman Mao 8. Saddam Hussein 9. Charles Manson 10. Vlad Tepes Interesting that they are all from the twentieth century except one Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CiaranM Posted January 15, 2008 Report Share Posted January 15, 2008 geeeezzzz .... well in relatively recent times it's hard to choose between 1. Hitler 2. Mao 3. Pol Pot or Stalin fucks sake .... how did i miss him .... well i haven't had my coffee yet. that's my excuse !!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave40 Posted January 15, 2008 Report Share Posted January 15, 2008 Vlad the Implaler!!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeusbheld Posted January 15, 2008 Report Share Posted January 15, 2008 1- Can?t name anybody else on TF could someone on TF nominate themselves? um... a friend wants to know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeusbheld Posted January 15, 2008 Report Share Posted January 15, 2008 H H Holmes, huh? kickin' old school jammiez? as serial killers go, i'm awfully fond of Jack Unterweger.... and John Wayne Gacy gives one good reason to be afraid of clowns... Thug Behram's resume is pretty impressive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samy5000 Posted January 15, 2008 Report Share Posted January 15, 2008 There are plenty of people that had the best intentions that went into general decay ( agree with all posted names ) and caused the deaths of thousands or millions. Some did it for power or greed, but had followers. Some were insane. I would say Joshua "General Butt Naked" Blahyi that admitted to killing thousands with his own machete while completely nude. To him, everyone was the enemy and ended up hacking up his own body guards. I don't think anybody has personally killed as many as he said he had with his own hands and without any cause except the joy of killing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Posted January 15, 2008 Report Share Posted January 15, 2008 All time favourite bad person: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernie009 Posted January 15, 2008 Report Share Posted January 15, 2008 None of them Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mazzy Posted January 15, 2008 Author Report Share Posted January 15, 2008 In this kind of exercise most people tend to nominate evil people that lived in recent times. More importance is given to the number of person killed over the way that they were killed. Man get nominated way more than women. Finally, political leaders tend to be more popular than say serial killers or straight up wacko's. And no ZBH, your friend can't nominate himself unless he's got material evidence of his evil deeds. (Can't wait to see what you'll come up with next.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeusbheld Posted January 15, 2008 Report Share Posted January 15, 2008 All time favourite bad person: a) where did you get my picture and you're not supposed to nominate people from TF. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeusbheld Posted January 15, 2008 Report Share Posted January 15, 2008 as far as nazis go, Albert Speer's one of the more interesting. Hitler's architect, he also drew up the plan for working jews to death in munitions factories, and managed the war economy in spite of bombing raids, shortages, etc thus prolonging the war. among other things. but his real genius was being at Hitler's side almost wire to wire and claiming no substantial involvement in the nazi war crimes... and all but getting away with it, at Nuremberg. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mazzy Posted January 15, 2008 Author Report Share Posted January 15, 2008 All time favourite bad person: a) where did you get my picture and you're not supposed to nominate people from TF. Zeus see previous post. If you want to nominate yourself, we need evidence... Bragging isn't worth points on the most evil list Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mazzy Posted January 15, 2008 Author Report Share Posted January 15, 2008 as far as nazis go, Albert Speer's one of the more interesting. Hitler's architect, he also drew up the plan for working jews to death in munitions factories, and managed the war economy in spite of bombing raids, shortages, etc thus prolonging the war. among other things. but his real genius was being at Hitler's side almost wire to wire and claiming no substantial involvement in the nazi war crimes... and all but getting away with it, at Nuremberg. I agree Speer was a most interesting character, a talented writer too. I'm not sure that I would call him evil though. He didn't intend to work anyone to death. Actually, he would have preferred to keep them healthy to increase the production rate. Point is, he was not evil, he just didn't care. Or, is that what evil is? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeusbheld Posted January 15, 2008 Report Share Posted January 15, 2008 ..And no ZBH, your friend can't nominate himself unless he's got material evidence of his evil deeds. (Can't wait to see what you'll come up with next.) um... the problem with that is ummm.... my friend might thereby incriminate himself. he could get arrested or something in most countries it's illegal to um....do bad things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CiaranM Posted January 15, 2008 Report Share Posted January 15, 2008 as far as nazis go, Albert Speer's one of the more interesting. Hitler's architect, he also drew up the plan for working jews to death in munitions factories, and managed the war economy in spite of bombing raids, shortages, etc thus prolonging the war. among other things. but his real genius was being at Hitler's side almost wire to wire and claiming no substantial involvement in the nazi war crimes... and all but getting away with it, at Nuremberg. I agree Speer was a most interesting character, a talented writer too. I'm not sure that I would call him evil though. He didn't intend to work anyone to death. Actually, he would have preferred to keep them healthy to increase the production rate. Point is, he was not evil, he just didn't care. Or, is that what evil is? yep ... he was evil !!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeusbheld Posted January 15, 2008 Report Share Posted January 15, 2008 as far as nazis go, Albert Speer's one of the more interesting. Hitler's architect, he also drew up the plan for working jews to death in munitions factories, and managed the war economy in spite of bombing raids, shortages, etc thus prolonging the war. among other things. but his real genius was being at Hitler's side almost wire to wire and claiming no substantial involvement in the nazi war crimes... and all but getting away with it, at Nuremberg. I agree Speer was a most interesting character, a talented writer too. I'm not sure that I would call him evil though. He didn't intend to work anyone to death. Actually, he would have preferred to keep them healthy to increase the production rate. Point is, he was not evil, he just didn't care. Or, is that what evil is? the thing is, his book has been debunked. his trial? it was a con job. he was in the middle of the whole thing. not only that, he pretty much got away with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yoi Posted January 15, 2008 Report Share Posted January 15, 2008 What pushes a man or a woman to become ?evil?? Actually what does it mean to be evil? One of my favorites is Henry Morgenthau, Jr. Under his plan whole German population was intentionaly being starved after 2nd world war causing millions of people to die. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yoi Posted January 15, 2008 Report Share Posted January 15, 2008 Stop making stuff up. The Morgenthau plan was mainly about industry. And it didn't affect the whole german population as all of east germany was under soviet rule. While there was a severe food shortage in Germany in the post war years, starving to death was fairly unusual and certainly didn't happen to "millions of people". Oh no, it was an evil plan to punish and starve whole population. Before accusing somebody of making things up you should check for yourself. Few quotes from wikipedia: The German Red Cross was dissolved, and the International Red Cross and the few other allowed international relief agencies were kept from helping Germans through strict controls on supplies and on travel.[13] The few agencies permitted to help Germans, such as the indigenous Caritas Verband, were not allowed to use imported supplies. When the Vatican attempted to transmit food supplies from Chile to German infants the U.S. State Department forbade it.[14] General Lucius Clay stated in October 1945 that: ? undoubtedly a large number of refugees have already died of starvation, exposure and disease?. The death rate in many places has increased several fold, and infant mortality is approaching 65 percent in many places. By the spring of 1946, German observers expect that epidemics and malnutrition will claim 2.5 to 3 million victims between the Oder and Elbe.[18] During 1946 the average German adult received less than 1,500 calories a day. 2,000 calories was then considered the minimum an individual can endure on for a limited period of time with reasonable health. The German food situation became worst during the very cold winter of 1946-1947, when German calorie intake ranged from 1,000-1,500 calories per day, a situation made worse by severe lack of fuel for heating.[21] Average adult calorie intake in U.S was 3,200-3,300, in UK 2,900 and in U.S. Army 4,000. Neither the Italians nor the Dutch could sell the vegetables that they had previously sold in Germany, with the consequence that the Dutch had to destroy considerable proportions of their crop. Denmark offered 150 tons of lard a month; Turkey offered hazelnuts; Norway offered fish and fish oil; Sweden offered considerable amounts of fats. The Allies were however not willing to let the Germans trade.[24] Surce: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eisenhower_and_German_POWs#American_forced_labor_policy_in_Germany_shortly_after_the_war Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeusbheld Posted January 15, 2008 Report Share Posted January 15, 2008 a hint? weakiepedia is only for explaining things, for filling in the storyline to the unfamiliar, not for backing your arguments up. <<insert saint jay's weakiepedia cartoon here please>> especially when you cite an article tagged "the neutrality of this article is in dispute." well played, keep up the work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yoi Posted January 15, 2008 Report Share Posted January 15, 2008 a hint? weakiepedia is only for explaining things, for filling in the storyline to the unfamiliar, not for backing your arguments up. I agree, Zeus, it was not my scholary attempt but more like explaining things. These statements can be checked in other sources. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeusbheld Posted January 15, 2008 Report Share Posted January 15, 2008 a hint? weakiepedia is only for explaining things, for filling in the storyline to the unfamiliar, not for backing your arguments up. I agree, Zeus, it was not my scholary attempt but more like explaining things. These statements can be checked in other sources. provide links to better sources pls, or at least names/authors of books. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.