Best / Worst Person on Earth

haah step off new jersey! We have Wawas, so that makes us cool.

Worst Person: Uday Hussein. He tortured Iraqi soccer players if they lost or made bad passes and such. And also, he tortured many others than just soccer players. Good thing is he got killed

jibba jabba
 
Best: Winton Churchill

Worst: Adolph Hitler and Stalin

------------------------------------

well then come visit me, oh my rules must be made clear : no lube allowed, no cum dodging and most of all no condoms and we must perform ass to mouth several times throughout the session.

Thanks,

Lateralis

i love 12 year olds, theyre so tasty and fresh, nice tight pink twats ready to plow open with my meat stick............oh wait your talking about 12 year fags on this site, oops - Lateralis

thats nothing, try calling the teachers nephew a retard so she freaks out and shoves a meter stick up your ass and tells you to jump up and down on it, towards the end of the year i would call her nephew a retard everyday just so i could bounce up and down on a meter stick, the other classmates even paid to take off my clothes while i did it - Lateralis

If I was a fat black chick, id live in a zoo- Lateralis

I have nothing, I dont save anything from ns, i have mostly porn on my comp tho- Lateralis

hahah yeah, if i was able to do a 1620 smoothly with a grab, do you think id still be in a shit ass town with a tiny ass hill?? no id be in mammoth ripping it up everyday repping my sponsors!-Lateralis

I almost broke my penis once, i fell down my gfs stairs naked and with a boner, i was never so scared in my life - Lateralis
 
all of you morons really have to think about what your saying when you call someone who just says bad things the worst person in the world, and you seem to forget about someone who murdered more than 6 million people, yes someone may say things that are horrible, but theres a big difference between saying something bad like ann coulter does, or actually doing something horrible like hitler did

--------------------

HIGH NORTH SESSION 4

The Hot Sauce Champion of the World
 
I define evil as actually believing something is right, not doing an action. Hitler was evil, but I said LIVING PEOPLE... someone like Saddam is all about facism because it gives him power. He doesn't think it's a good thing, he just likes power. He's still bad, but someone who honestly believes, for example, that native americans are inferior, is worse. Lineskier, you're way too dead-set on utilitarianism as a moral theory, it's horribly flawed. Actions are not right based solely on the consequences they produce.

------------

In a haze

A stormy haze

I’ll be around

I’ll be loving you

Always

Always

Here I am

And I’ll take my time

Here I am

And I’ll wait in line

Always

Always...
 
please tell me how you know that saddam doesnt thing fascism is right

--------------------

HIGH NORTH SESSION 4

The Hot Sauce Champion of the World
 
sorry i mean thinks its a good thing, not thinks its right

--------------------

HIGH NORTH SESSION 4

The Hot Sauce Champion of the World
 
I don't... he's simply never said that. Besides which, his clinging to power when it makes no sense to do so certainly seemed to indicate that he was more interested in it than in anything else. Not really an idealistic dictator. Still a bad guy, but not in the sense of 'We'd all be better off if people of this religion were all dead'. More of an 'I'd be better off if people who oppose me were dead'. I see a distinction there. Now, that's all speculation, and maybe I'm wrong and he's Satan... I've just seen nothing to indicate him being worse than plain awful.

------------

In a haze

A stormy haze

I’ll be around

I’ll be loving you

Always

Always

Here I am

And I’ll take my time

Here I am

And I’ll wait in line

Always

Always...
 
Not to say that I'd argue if someone put him forward as the most evil guy on earth. You'd have ground to stand on there.

------------

In a haze

A stormy haze

I’ll be around

I’ll be loving you

Always

Always

Here I am

And I’ll take my time

Here I am

And I’ll wait in line

Always

Always...
 
and also your in no position to tell me that what i think is wrong, this is your problem, your so damn sure of yourself and your own ideas that you think you can tell me that im wrong, in this situation i believe that actions speak louder than words, hitler killed 6 million people because he thought jews were inferior, which makes him a bad enough person, but he acted on his beliefs and killed 6 million people, which makes him worse than anyone who says anything, i dont care if that person says that they hate all kinds of people and liberals should die or whatnot, but at least that person didnt act on their thoughts and commit genocide, also my great aunt survived the holocaust and i have heard from her how bad the holocaust was, and how a lot more than 6 million people suffered, so i would say that in this situation someones actions and the consequences of their actions are a lot more important than someone elses ideas

--------------------

HIGH NORTH SESSION 4

The Hot Sauce Champion of the World
 
Fine Fine, J.D. May

Worst: Bin Ladden

Best: Rudolph Giuliani

Since the September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attacks on the World Trade Center, Giuliani has been widely hailed for his calm and effective leadership in the crisis. For this, he was named TIME magazine's Person of the Year for 2001 and was given an honorary knighthood by Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom on February 13, 2002, entitling him to style himself 'Rudolph Giuliani KBE'.

I almost broke my penis once, i fell down my gfs stairs naked and with a boner, i was never so scared in my life - Lateralis

I have nothing, I dont save anything from ns, i have mostly porn on my comp tho- Lateralis

If I was a fat black chick, id live in a zoo- Lateralis

Hi, My name is Matt and I'm a postaholic

 
What about people like:

Charles Manson, Ted Bundy, David Berkowitz, John Wayne Gacy Jr., Jeffrey Dahmer, Jack the Ripper, or Marshall Applewhite (leader of heaven's gate) ?

Eat. Sleep. Breathe. Ski.

 
my reasoning for not liking moore is because he uses his money and fame to manipulate people into becoming these push overs who hate america, as moore does himself. he shops his 'documentarys' to change what people say. documentarys are factual information. his are ficton that contain false acqusations.

bin laden on the other hand, dont turn his followers around on HIS OWN COUNTRY. maybe michael moore isnt running planes into bulidings, but he is distorting the truth for his own profit. mind over matter.

'if the president is anything like you, atlantaski, i hope someone smacks him with a golf club and shits in his mouth.' CrystalNeedsSomething...

BUM LOVING FOR LIFE!

'If i was a slutty white chick id rather have a 14 inch beast in my twat than a 6 inch white man cock' -Lateralis
 
^i think only people who are alive are being considered and I know some of those cats are dead.

Best:ALTANKTASKI

Worst:J.D May

God is an American.
 
Irish you couldnt of said that any better, I'm proud of you.

-People say marijuana ruins your life, I just say I take the scenic route-

 
wow, nice statements IrishDrink87

I almost broke my penis once, i fell down my gfs stairs naked and with a boner, i was never so scared in my life - Lateralis

I have nothing, I dont save anything from ns, i have mostly porn on my comp tho- Lateralis

If I was a fat black chick, id live in a zoo- Lateralis

Hi, My name is Matt and I'm a postaholic

 
Moore hates America? He's trying to open your eyes to the truth, you fucknuts! Your country is headed for a decline, and fast. When he said americans are stupid, I'm really sorry, but he's right. Your education system is destitute... a big chunk of your population is a bunch of ignorant redneck sods. Don't you think it's time for a change? (Note, I'm not saying that John Kerry is the man who will change everything...).

And as for John Edwards... he made his money by being a prosecution lawyer, suing a grocery store because (this is an invented example) some little old lady bruised her arm on a box of cereals, stuff like that. Of course, some of his cases might have been founded on a good accusation, I'm just saying that most lawsuits in the U.S are from people in for a quick buck. He was, sadly, chosen as VP mainly because Kerry looks like Frankestein and he needed a pretty-boy to relate to people.

*******************

'I'm the master of low expectations.'

'I understand small business growth. I was one'

-Dubya!

 
Its ok Canadaskigod talk shit all you want, just dont say we dint try to make a world a better place when Muhhamed Jareef Shahmud is running Canada and telling you what to do and when to do it...

-People say marijuana ruins your life, I just say I take the scenic route-

 
''and also your in no position to tell me that what i think is wrong, this is your problem, your so damn sure of yourself and your own ideas that you think you can tell me that im wrong, in this situation i believe that actions speak louder than words''

You're not wrong because I say you're wrong, you're wrong because the ethical theory you're basing your belief system on makes no logical sense. This isn't a criticism of you, lots of smart people have believed in it (Jeremy Bentham, John Stuart Mill, others), but it is incorrect. I don't have time to disprove it now, but I'll bring this back later and do so.

------------

In a haze

A stormy haze

I’ll be around

I’ll be loving you

Always

Always

Here I am

And I’ll take my time

Here I am

And I’ll wait in line

Always

Always...
 
what a pointless post. i really do not see the need for this.

XxXxXxXxXxXxXxXxXxXxXxXxXxXxXxXx

Progression is a work in progress

-P.J. Cliche
 
Ok, here it is, now that I'm home. I don't say things I don't at least try to back up.

Reasons Lineskier's Moral Point of View is Wrong

Lineskier10 wanted me to back this up. Now, to sum up what he's saying, it is that Hitler was wrong because he killed millions, Saddam is wrong because of his actions, etc. In a general sense, the theory here is that actions are right or wrong based solely on their consequences. The right action, then, would be that which has the best consequences (produces the most good), and anything else is the wrong action, though some wrong actions are worse than others. This theory is called utilitarianism. Here are the reasons that it is wrong.

1. It is overly demanding.

In a broad sense, if actions are right or wrong based on their consequences, we are morally required to do what will produce the greatest sum total of good (assume by this we mean happiness for now; anything else gets us into an argument about value that would be irrelevant to this discussion anyways) in the world. We can immediately see that the utilitarian formula of 'everybody to count, morally, for himself, and nobody to count more than for himself' makes each of us no more morally important than the guy next to us. Our happiness is no more important than his, nor is it more important than some guy in somalia's. The problem: Let's say you want to spend 5$ to go and see a movie. However, if you were to send that money to africa to feed needy children, the happiness of more people would rise to a greater degree than yours would if you were to see the movie. Therefore, it is right to send the money to Africa, and wrong to see the movie. If we lived life this way, we can clearly see the problem. Being a less than altruistic individual, yourself, Lineskier, this might be reason enough to reject your moral theory.

2. It eliminates supererogation

If it's morally required that we always do what promotes the greatest good, then there can be no such thing as going above and beyond the call of duty. We are always required to do that which is absolutely best, and therefore it makes little sense to praise us; we are merely acting, in doing right, as we're expected to.

3. It is unjust

In that it fails to treat the system of retributive justice seriously. For example, a scientist who is nearly finished developing a cure for cancer decides to murder a dozen children one night. Utilitarianism says that we shouldn't lock him up, we should let him finish his cure for cancer, even if that means we can NEVER lock him up. Another example: imagine a case where a young girl has been raped and murdered, and a large angry mob has formed demanding justice. If they are not appeased, they will riot, causing injuries, damage, and perhaps death. In order to avoid this, you have the chance to frame a lonesome stranger who has just arrived in town. no one will ever know he is not guilty. Utilitarianism says that it is right to frame this stranger.

4. It fails to take promises seriously

Basically, the implication is that keeping one's promises has no intrinsic moral value, and is only morally worthwhile if it wouldn't cause more happiness to forget about the promise. For example, I promise to wash your car a week from today. A week later you've forgotten about the promise, and don't really care if your car is washed, anyways. I'd be happier not doing it. In this situation, not only would keeping my promise have no moral value, according to utilitarianism, but it would be WRONG.

5. Average and Total versions both produce absurdities.

There are two major forms of utilitarianism, average and total. Total states that the right action is the one that causes the sum total of happiness in the world to increase. This is absurd because it implies that having a lot of children is the moral action, as even if we're all slightly less happy than we were with a more heavily populated planet, there will be more people on it to be happy (even if they aren't THAT happy) and therefore the sum is higher. Average utilitarianism says that we should do whatever raises the average happiness in the world. This one's even worse. Take the following situation. you have 2 countries, Country A, and Country B. Country A is prosperous, stable, and has a reasonably happy population. Country B is a third world shantytown of a country, where everyone is starving and miserable. Country A nukes country B, killing everyone. Average happiness goes way up.

7. It requires us to enter the experience machine

This argument was invented by Robert Nozick, I have no idea why he called it this. Imagine a machine that, once you're in it, simulates a great life. Like the matrix, but it's bliss. You do everything you'd want to do in your life, and you never know it's a fake. Would you want to enter this machine if it was invented? Utilitarianism says we all should, but many of us would say no, simply because the experiences aren't 'real'.

I have twice that many, but I'm tired of typing them out. But I don't really need to put any more nails in that theory's coffin, people have been doing so for a long, long time. So you'll either have to change your moral perspective to something less illogical, or at least tweak it a bit, but I should warn you that every time someone's come up with a new form of utilitarianism, it's been promptly shot down. There is more to morality than the consequences. In fact, they really don't matter at all from a moral perspective. They can be good or bad, but not immoral or moral. Morality is reserved for agents themselves.

------------

In a haze

A stormy haze

I’ll be around

I’ll be loving you

Always

Always

Here I am

And I’ll take my time

Here I am

And I’ll wait in line

Always

Always...
 
michael moore totally took advantage of charlton heston!!!!!!he is also making millions of dollars for his movies!!!!

.
 
an unknown fact... hitler ordered the killing of 6 million people, stalin ordered the killing of 20 million of his own people

'i am the malcolm x of masturbation'

- Brian Keith Etheridge
 
How is that unknown... anyone with any historical knowledge knew that.

------------

In a haze

A stormy haze

I’ll be around

I’ll be loving you

Always

Always

Here I am

And I’ll take my time

Here I am

And I’ll wait in line

Always

Always...
 
indeed

I almost broke my penis once, i fell down my gfs stairs naked and with a boner, i was never so scared in my life - Lateralis

I have nothing, I dont save anything from ns, i have mostly porn on my comp tho- Lateralis

If I was a fat black chick, id live in a zoo- Lateralis

Hi, My name is Matt and I'm a postaholic

 
BEST: Alyson Michalka---SHES HOT AS HELL!!!!(erm plays some girl named 'Keely' on a Disney show my brother watches

WORST: JCM8 for stealing my fucking pictures and posting it in the 'Many uses of duct tape' thread and not giving me credit!!!!!!!!!

Who needs pants when you can rock the shorts all year?

East Cost Skier
 
People can't differentiate between the leader and the country, and that scares the hell out of me. Hating the leader of the country does not mean you hate the country. If you disagree with the leader, and think he's harming the country, and SUPPORT him nonetheless, you're acting hatefully towards your country. This is basic common sense, but unfortunately...well, people are idiots.

------------

In a haze

A stormy haze

I’ll be around

I’ll be loving you

Always

Always

Here I am

And I’ll take my time

Here I am

And I’ll wait in line

Always

Always...
 
if all michael moore did was inspire change by employing freedom of speech, than far fewer people would hate him. what makes what he does immoral is that he smears other people's reputation with lies, and profits from it, while misleading the public, and the entire time he poses as a 'noble and heroic documentarian trying to save the country.' it's just downright deceitful.

================================================

No one on their death bed ever said, 'I wish I'd played it safe' -blind_five
 
Scott I agree with what you said to the t. Michael Moore is a lying fat son-of a-bitch. Hes the kinda guy thatd youd see on some infomercial early in the morning talking about all the starving in (some African country). Meanwhile his fat ass gets rich off of lies and blames Bush for it when it wasnt any of Bush's fault to begin with. How can one expect an administration to know all about certain activities that shouldve been taken care of in the previous one...coughs *WTC BOMBINGS(first one*coughs...Well I'll let that speak for itself. And from a New Yorkers POV whos been in the hole at Ground Zero all those fucking towelheads should die!

Who needs pants when you can rock the shorts all year?

East Cost Skier
 
^FUCKING WORD MAN

'if the president is anything like you, atlantaski, i hope someone smacks him with a golf club and shits in his mouth.' CrystalNeedsSomething...

BUM LOVING FOR LIFE!

'If i was a slutty white chick id rather have a 14 inch beast in my twat than a 6 inch white man cock' -Lateralis
 
i think a lot of people exaggerate when they talk about their opinion of people who act in ways that they disapprove of. people say things that come across as real hatred, but it isn't meant that way. i don't feel any hatred towards Moore. I have basically zero respect for him, and he angers me sometimes, well, a lot of times, but there's a difference between that and really despising him. a lot of people do this, in an attempt to convey how they feel, and they just can't articulate it. i'm just as guilty as the next person.

like, let's say, just for imagination's sake, that I was a 007 type secret agent type with a license to kill, and i could take him out and it would cause no harm to anyone in the world (remember, this is a pretend, perfect simulated world), then I still wouldn't do it.

i don't know why i chose to explain it like that, i just did. one thing i would like to say about the whole concept of this thread, as far as the worst person goes, is that i have this faith that there is some good in every person to begin with. it is evident that there are individuals in this messed up world just totally lose that good part that is within them, but i still want to resist the urge to totally write them off. but at the same time, i don't want to tolerate anyone like that. they are better off just eradicated. does anyone know what i mean? i hope so

================================================

No one on their death bed ever said, 'I wish I'd played it safe' -blind_five
 
dang it, i'm having another one of those moments where i just can't really articulate how i feel. i've got to get better at writing.

================================================

No one on their death bed ever said, 'I wish I'd played it safe' -blind_five
 
What makes people 'best' or 'worst'?

There seems to be a problem in determining what we're going to call a 'good' or 'evil' person. There is apparently some confusion between peoples' moralities and peoples' sympathies. Let me try to alleviate some of this. In the following examples, anything referred to as a 'bad morality' is a morality whose principles I disapprove of. I can't prove that mine is any better, of course, but for our purposes, if you agree with me that the principles being talked about (ie: slavery is right, killing Jews is our duty, people should suffer and others should enjoy watching it) are immoral, that is all that matters. By 'morality', I mean a set of principles of action that we adhere to, and by 'sympathy', I mean any feeling one has for another, for example pity. These latter aren't moral judgments. There are many instances where sympathy can make us want to do something immoral.

Huck Finn has been helping his friend Jim escape. Huck feels very guilty about this, because as a part of his morality, owning a person is the same as owning any other piece of property. Jim's owner had never done anything bad to Huck, so he feels badly about stealing him away. He feels sickened by Jim saying that he will 'steal' his children out of slavery, another moral wrong according to Huck's morality. This is a 'bad morality'. However, Huck's sympathy is warring with it; as he leaves the raft, intent on telling people searching for Jim where he is, Jim thanks Huck, and calls him the 'bes' fren' Jim's ever had'. Huck is no longer certain whether he wants to tell on Jim or not, and in the end, decides against it, because he feels sympathy for Jim's situation. In fact, he does wrong again by lying to people hunting for the runaway slave. He feels badly about the decision later, having betrayed his morality, but realizes that he would have felt badly, too, if he'd given Jim up. As a result, he rejects the idea of doing right or wrong. It does not occur to him to simply revise his bad morality, that maybe owning people isn't right. That isn't the point. The point is that Huck gives weight to both his sympathies and his morals, and acts rightly because of it.

Second example: Heinrich Himmler of the SS, another case of a bad morality in conflict with sympathies. Himmler was known to make speeches about trying to wipe out the Jews 'without our leaders and their men suffering any damage in their minds and souls'. He recognized that people, in following their orders and doing their moral duty as it was presented to them, would have nagging sympathies. If they did not, they would become beastly savages. His psychologist reports that he suffered from several disabilities, including nausea and stomach convulsions, apparently because of his distaste at what he felt he was duty-bound to do. He saw it as a 'great burden' to have to kill all of these people (and yes, he said this sort of thing a lot), but, unfortunately, his bad morality won out over his sympathies, and he did his duty. Because of this, he is a worse person than Huck Finn.

John Edwards was a philosopher and a rather celebrated historical figure from the 18th century, and he is our third example. His morality was worse than Himmler's. According to Edwards, God condemns some men to an eternity of unimaginably awful pain, while arbitrarily sparing others (arbitrarily because noone DESERVES to be spared). His position is that men OUGHT to be condemned to hell, and this is not only right because God wants it; rather, God wants it because it is right independently. He says that God is right in damning people, because God is infinitely excellent, so any sin against him is infinitely bad, and deserves infinitely bad punishment. Edwards HIMSELF did not torment the damned, but his sympathies didn't conflict with the approval of eternal torment. He didn't flinch at the idea of a human being, tortured for eternity:

'The God that holds you over the pit of hell, much as one holds aspider or some loathsome insect over the fire, abhors you, and is dreadfully provoked... he is of purer eyes than to bear to have you in his sight; you are ten thousand times so abominable in his eyes as the most hateful serpent is in ours.'

He goes on to say that the saints, in heaven will understand how horrible the suffering is of those in hell, and yet will feel no pity for them; rather, he says, just as we do when we see the problems other people have, the saints' own state of bliss will seem much better from their perspective than it already was:

''When they shall see how miserable others of their fellow-creatures are... when they shall see the smoke of their torment.. and hear their dolorous shrieks and cries, and consider that they in the mean time are in the most blissful state, and surely to be in it to all eternity, how they will rejoice!''

He also says that it is RIGHT that the saints should rejoice at seeing others tortured in hell. This suggests that there are no sympathies playing a role in Edwards' judgments of good and evil, and because of this, he turns out to be a worse man than Himmler, despite not having killed anyone.

It's worth noting that all of these people, with their bad moralities, do not see those moralities as flawed. It wouldn't make sense to accept a morality and call it flawed; that would be like believing in something one knows to be false. However, the strength of their character lies not in this, but in the sympathy factor. I'm not saying sympathy should be given a free reign, as it's often necessary to ignore it in favour of the right action (going to war against Hitler despite wanting not to kill people). However, this does give a clearer indication as to what makes a person good or evil, at least in my view. Feel free to question it.

------------

In a haze

A stormy haze

I’ll be around

I’ll be loving you

Always

Always

Here I am

And I’ll take my time

Here I am

And I’ll wait in line

Always

Always...
 
I cant really add to this. as ive allready stated my thoughts on best and worst. But I really like what you wrote JD. Whould you call it philosophy or rethoric or something else?

It was interesting to read.

 
If you mean that last thing, it's a take on virtue ethics, so it's a philosophy.

------------

In a haze

A stormy haze

I’ll be around

I’ll be loving you

Always

Always

Here I am

And I’ll take my time

Here I am

And I’ll wait in line

Always

Always...
 
Best: Owen Wilson........

Worst: Sean Hannity or Bill o'Reilly....lying right wing, george W packing ass.......

Ya Jamican Me Crazy
 
ah ahhahaha, wow - THE VAST RIGHT WING CONSPIRACY OH NO!!!!! i mean seriously - bill o'reilly makes hitler look like the muffin man

_________________________________________

1. Cover your stump before you hump.

2. Before you attack her, wrap your attacker.

3. Don't be silly, protect your willy.

4. When in doubt, shroud your spout.

5. Don't be a loner, cover your boner.

6. You can't go wrong if you shield your dong.

7. If you're not going to sack it, go home and whack it.

8. If you think she's spunky, cover your monkey.

9. If you slip between her thighs, be sure to condomize.

10. It will be sweeter if you wrap your peter.

11. She won't get sick if you wrap your dick

12. If you go into heat, package your meat.

13. While you're undressing venus, dress up that penis.

14. When you take of her pants and blouse, be sure to suit up your trouser mouse.

15. Especially in December, gift wrap your member.

16. Never, never deck her with an unwrapped pecker.
 
last I checked, Manson was still alive and is locked up in maximum security.

But here are a few other contenders for some of the ''worst'' people on earth:

PEDRO ALONSO LOPEZ- 300+ murders

Place: Peru, Columbia and Ecuador

Date: 1970s

Victims: Young girls, mostly pre-teens

Lopez was kicked out by his prostitute mother at the age of eight, after she caught him fondling his younger sister. He was picked up by a paedophile and raped, and was laer gang-banged in prison, retaliating by killing three of his rapists. By 1978 it's reckoned he'd killed at least 100 girls in Peru; when attention fell on him he moved back to his native Columbia and then on to Ecuador.

Here he killed three girls a week on average, preferring them because they were 'more gentle and trusting, more innocent.' In 1980 uncovered one of his many victims' graves and he was rapidly arrested and tricked into confession whilst being held in prison.

At first police refused to believe the numbers he mentioned but he quickly identified the sites of more than 50 burials, lending credence to his claim as the most prolific serial killer to date. He was convicted of murder in Ecuador, Lopez will languish in prison for the rest of his life.

NIKOLAI DZHURMONGALIEV- 100 murders

Place: Russia

Date;1980 - 1991

Victims: Women, usually tall attractive ones

They like cannibalism in Russia - perhaps it's the poor state of the local scoff. NIKOLAI DZHURMONGALIEV - known as 'Metal Fang' because of his white metal false teeth - is the king of the Soviet cannibals, slaughtering and serving up around 100 women to his dinner guests in the Russian republic of Kazakhstan. he believed women and prostitution were the root of all evil. After friends discovered a head and intestines in the kitchen he was sent to an insane asylum in Tashkent, from which he bribed his way out. he was then incarcarated after being found guilty of only seven murders, but escaped in 1989. The Russian authorities never admitted he'd got out, and spent two years trying to recapture him, eventually tracking him to Uzbekistan. Interior Minister Colonel Yuri Dubyagin described him as: 'absolutly normal, but at one point he got a taste of female meat.' An attitude which may explain why there are so many high-scoring serial killers in Russia. He was held not responsable for his actions, he's back in the loony bin.

AHMAD SURADJI- 42 murders

Place: North Sumatra

Date: 1997

Victims: Women

Suradji was in Indonesian witch doctor who buried his victims near his house, with the hekp of his three wives. He had a reputation for paranormal powers and preyed on women who secretly asked hm to cast spells on their husbands or families. He charged each one $200 - 400, then buried them up to the waist in a nearby sugercane plantation as part of the ritual. He'd then strangle them with cable, strip them and drink their saliva. Arrested in 1997, he told police he needed to kill 70 women to get magical powers. Although only 40 bodies were found, over 80 women are still missing in the area.

RICHARD 'ICEMAN' KUKLINSKI- 40+ murders

Place: USA

Date: 1980's

Kuklinski started out by ambushing and beating to death another kid who bullied him, and discovered he enjoyed killing - he blew a mans head off over a bet and sliced up another one open to see how long it took him to bleed to death. A motorist who cut him up was run off the road and beaten to death. He was arrested in 1983 in an undercover cocaine-dealing operation; it wasn't until later the police realised he planned to kill the undercover cop and take the money and drugs. In custody, he claimed most of his kills were hit jobs done to support his family. Kuklinski got life and is now in a maximum security cell in New Jersey.

Eat. Sleep. Breathe. Ski.

 
Why am I an idiot?

If it's because of my views on Micheal Moore: look guys, let's say that Bill O'Reilly is roughly the Micheal Moore of republicans, he has a show (instead of a movie) which showcases biaised facts and opinions. Do I hate Bill O'Reilly because he represents anything that I think is wrong? No!!! If Bill O'Reilly came out with a movie, called (example) Kerry's secret past, would I be like 'OH THAT BALD BITCH IS SO UGLY, HE IS SO BIAISED!!!'? No! Look, respect his fucking opinion, don't watch his movie, and why would you hate him for exposing the truth?

If it's because on my view on the U.S education: Of course every country has there slice of ignorant population, not because they're dumb, but because of a vicious circle that goes from the parents, who don't have money, thus send their kids to crappier public school, then don't have the money for college and thus are ignorant, entirely not because of their fault but because of circumstances, and thus get a crappy job and don't know how life works (capital, politics, etc.), are brainwashed stuff on the news, have kids, send them to crappy schools, and the circle continues and that what I'm also saying is that this circle is bigger in the U.S and that some of the values transmitted by the news are not the kind that make you respected throughout the world. My point, though, is that it is time to change. Don't you think so? It's time to start investing in programs that will make a good education more available, or give funds to go to college, or to reform the education massively, to product people who can advance in life, not work at a Wal-Mart... How can you hate me for saying that?

*******************

'I'm the master of low expectations.'

'I understand small business growth. I was one'

-Dubya!

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top