0
   

The Ultimate Mass Murderer

 
 
Reply Tue 16 Nov, 2004 04:21 pm
Sort of a ghoulish topic, but something people need to know about...




Mass Murderers

What does it mean to be a mass murderer? How many people do you have to kill to get on the list, and what does it take to get up towards the top of the list?

The term is overused to a large extent. There are only about a half dozen or so people in the upper ranks of mass murderers, and the gulf between that half dozen or so and the people on the next rung down is so vast that it almost can't be viewed as the same thing.

Working from the bottom upwards, you'd start off with ordinary criminals who simply rose a little above the norm in the course of the criminal business, or who developed a fondness for killing people and began to do it as a hobby rather than as part of their business. One of these guys might end up killing a dozen to a few hundred people, enough for garish headlines, but several orders of magnitude from being worthy of the history books. These guys would be the bottom tier.

http://www.mayhem.net/Crime/murder1.html

For the tiers above the bottom one, being a criminal would not suffice; you need to be a politician. The next tier upwards would consist of every tribal chief, king, or military commander whose numbers ever got up into the thousands or tens of thousands.

The next tier would consist of people who, both in modern and ancient times, managed to kill somewhere between a few hundred thousand and a few million people, but not tens of millions. This tier would include Atilla the Hun, Genseric the Vandal, Idi Amin, Pol Pot, and all such similar types.

http://varna.info.bg/attila.gif
Atilla the Hun

At some point in such a study, you'd get to your really serious kinds of mass murderers. The first person in history who anybody would associate with the first tier of mass murderers was Chengis Khan.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genghis_Khan

Quote:

"...Also, Genghis Khan's waging of war was characterized by wholesale destruction on unprecedented scale and radically changed the demographic situation in Asia. According to the works of Iranian historian Rashid-ad-Din Fadl Allah, Mongols massacred over 700,000 people in Merv and more than a million in Nishapur. China suffered a drastic decline in population as a direct result of the Khan: before the Mongol invasion, China had about 100 million inhabitants; after the complete conquest, 1279, the census in 1300 showed it to have roughly 60 million people. This does not, of course, mean that Genghis Khan's men were directly responsible for the deaths of 40 million people, but it does give a sense of the ferocity of the onslaught."


http://upo.unesco.org/cover/3103405co1150.jpg
Chengis Khan

The large, settled areas of the world at the time of Chengis Khan included North China (Kin realm), Southern China (Sung), Turkistan/Khwarism, India, and Europe/Russia and of those only India escaped the attentions of the Mongols, who had learned to wage wars over degrees of lattitude and longitude while most of the world's peoples never ventured more than twenty miles from the places of their births.

Other than for warfare in China however, after the invasions of Europe around 1240 and the levant around 1256, Mongols embarked upon no further foreign wars which involved killing vast numbers of people, and settled down into a lifestyle of trade and occasional raids for plunder.

That went on for several generations until a man named Timur, or Tamerlane arose in the mid to late 1300s to try to reestablish a global empire along lines similar to those established by Chengis Khan.

http://user.it.uu.se/~timka/timour-lenk/timour-lenk.gif

Tamerlane

Some view Tamerlane as being another first tier mass murderer and for sure he did establish dominion over an area which included parts of India, Russia, and the near East. Nonetheless he never got into China and for that reason his numbers could not have approached those of the Mongols proper. Tamerlane is mainly remembered for terror tactics, making pyramids of the skulls of opponents and the like.

Between the times of Chengis Khan and Tamerlane, and of the modern age, there are two episodes which anybody might figure belonged in the same league or close to it; one would be the inquisition, and the other the Thirty Years War.

From most of what I read, the inquisition has been overrated in terms of the sheer numbers of people who are commonly supposed to have fallen victim to it. Some of this is undoubtedly due to the fact of the inquisition having reached its zenith in southern Europe, chiefly Spain, and much of its history being written by the English who were the chief adversaries of Spain at the time. Nobody ever looks terribly good in the other guy's history books.

http://www.catholic.com/library/Inquisition.asp

The thirty years war in the 1600s turned Germany into a pigpen from end to end and resulted in the deaths of millions of people, but not tens of millions. The one military chieftain who stands out in that war was King Gustavus Adolphus of Sweden and for that reason, some tend to lump him into the first tier of mass murderers along with the Subudais and Tamerlanes. Nonetheless, the causes of the Thirty Years War were so numerous and convoluted, that it's hard to give any one person credit for all of the grief it caused.

http://www.pipeline.com/~cwa/TYWHome.htm

Including Gustavus Adolphus in the ranks with Tamerlane or Chengis Khan would therefore be a sort of a stretch.

http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/gustafad.jpg
Gustavus Adolphus of Sweden

Some might also want to rank Suleiman of Turkey into that same sort of category and there is no doubt he did his share of killing; nonetheless anybody who was decisevely defeated by the Poles does not belong on any list of conquerors or first or second tier mass murderers.


After the Thirty Years War, there was a long interlude without any killing on the same scale. The wars of the late 1600s and the 1700s were organized gangfights pitting royal houses against eachother, followed by the wars of Napoleon which did not kill vast numbers of people, and then most of a century without any major wars. WW-I killed large numbers of people but there was no one person you could blame for it, and then you arrive at the modern age and the three guys who resurrected the kinds of numbers which Chengis Khan used to put up.

Hitler, Stalin, and Mao Tse Tung

http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/tyrants.htm


http://www.joric.com/Hitler-official.jpg
Adolf Hitler

http://www.xtec.es/~lvallmaj/preso/stalin.jpg
Joe Stalin

http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1420000/images/_1422194_mao150.jpg
Mao Tse Tung


I would assume everybody is pretty much familiar with modern history and with the claims to fame (in terms of mass murder) of each of the three gentlemen pictured above. Now, if you didn't know better, you might think that that was pretty much the end of the story, and that somewhere between Chengis Khan and whoever is tops amongst the three guys pictured above, that had to be the all time record for mass murder, somewhere around 20 - 40 million people at the outside and the honest truth is that Chengis Khan in his own lifetime was probably at no more than 10 - 20 million, the big numbers for the Mongol empire coming after his death.

Nonetheless, anybody who had it figured that way would be wrong. There is a guy, in fact, who puts everybody mentioned here so far absolutely to shame, and who makes Chengis Khan, Tamerlane, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Suleiman, Gustavus Adolphus and all the rest look absolutely like pikers.

http://www.epa.gov/history/images/ruck1.jpg
William Ruckelshaus

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2001/05/images/0419_carson.jpg
Rachel Carson

William Ruckelshaus, a yuppy beaurocrat serving as first director of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of the United States Government, by the single act of banning the super pesticide DDT, has killed around 90 (ninety) million people to date.

http://www.junkscience.com/malaria_clock.htm


Virtually all of what most of us have read about DDT turns out to be bunk, and junk science. There were guys who fell into vats of it in the 50s who are still walking around, and there is no real evidence of it being harmful to birds. By the mid 50s, DDT had nearly wiped malaria, polio, and a number of other insect-borne plagues off of this planet; by a single misguided beaurocratic act, Ruckelshaus undid all of that and plunged much of the world back into a dark age of disease and grief.

http://www.junkscience.com/ddtfaq.htm

Some might claim that Ruckelshaus was some sort of a racist intent upon ridding the planet of the kinds of people who live in malaria-infested areas. Much more likely, he was a typical beaurocrat obeying the primary dictum of all such people to cover his own ass, and heeding the ruckus and commotion caused by leftwing pseudoscientists and ideologues like Rachel Carson, whose book "Silent Spring" produced much of the disinformation we read about DDT.

What became of Rachel Carson? She'd probably down there screwing one of the guys mentioned on this page, in some sort of a boudoire which is kept at 1500 degrees F. I mean, for people with the deaths of 90 million people on their hands, airconditioning can become a problem...
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 25,374 • Replies: 161
No top replies

 
cavfancier
 
  0  
Reply Tue 16 Nov, 2004 04:27 pm
So the point of this thread is...
0 Replies
 
blueveinedthrobber
 
  0  
Reply Tue 16 Nov, 2004 04:38 pm
the point is there is no point.....
0 Replies
 
cavfancier
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Nov, 2004 04:40 pm
Bi-Polar Bear wrote:
the point is there is no point.....


Ya think?
0 Replies
 
cavfancier
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Nov, 2004 04:43 pm
Oh, by the way, who the heck is 'Chengis Khan?'
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Nov, 2004 04:58 pm
cavfancier wrote:
Oh, by the way, who the heck is 'Chengis Khan?'


Mongols pronounce the name 'Chengis'. Russians write the name and title as one word beginning with the upside-down 'h' which is 'ch' in Cyrillic, i.e. 'Chengisxhan'.

As I noted, the guy was sort of overrated, at least as far as mass murder goes, and doesn't begin to compare to Rachel Carson or Ruckelshaus.

DDT was a huge cause amongst leftists and greenies back around the late 60s and early 70s. It's good that they (the leftists and greenies) should understand what sort of consequences their stupidity has had.
0 Replies
 
panzade
 
  0  
Reply Tue 16 Nov, 2004 05:04 pm
You don't happen to be the fellow that fell in the vat, are you?

From the EPA:

DDT
What is DDT?
Prior to 1972 when its use was banned, DDT was a commonly used pesticide. Although it is no longer used or produced in the United States, we continue to find DDT in our environment. Other parts of the world continue to use DDT in agricultural practices and in disease-control programs. Therefore, atmospheric deposition is the current source of new DDT contamination in our Great Lakes. DDT, and its break-down products DDE and DDD, are persistent, bioacculumative, and toxic (PBT) pollutants target by EPA.

Why Are We Concerned About DDT?
Even though DDT has been banned since 1972, it can take more than 15 years to break down in our environment. Fish consumption advisories are in effect for DDT in many waterways including the Great Lakes ecosystem.

What harmful effects can DDT have on us?
Probable human carcinogen
Damages the liver
Temporarily damages the nervous system
Reduces reproductive success
Can cause liver cancer
Damages reproductive system
0 Replies
 
panzade
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Nov, 2004 05:11 pm
I was just funnin Gunga.

I did notice that there were some articles in Junk Science that disproves our alarm over DDT..but it's sort of a stretch to call Rachel Carson a top tier mass murderer.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Nov, 2004 06:10 pm
panzade wrote:

What harmful effects can DDT have on us?
Probable human carcinogen
Damages the liver
Temporarily damages the nervous system
Reduces reproductive success
Can cause liver cancer
Damages reproductive system


You might want to try actually reading that DDT FAQ I linked on junkscience.com. For instance:

Quote:

Extensive hearings on DDT before an EPA administrative law judge occurred during 1971-1972. The EPA hearing examiner, Judge Edmund Sweeney, concluded that "DDT is not a carcinogenic hazard to man... DDT is not a mutagenic or teratogenic hazard to man... The use of DDT under the regulations involved here do not have a deleterious effect on freshwater fish, estuarine organisms, wild birds or other wildlife."
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  0  
Reply Tue 16 Nov, 2004 06:18 pm
we used to use lead and arsenic in agriculture also.
"Agrochemicaals Desk Reference"ISBN 0-87371-738-4

P130, DDT-acute toxicity for trout and sunfiish = 8 parts per billion in water. US Fish and Wildlife

PS-A part per billion is the equivalent of one shotglass in 16 railroad tankers of water.
0 Replies
 
panzade
 
  0  
Reply Tue 16 Nov, 2004 06:20 pm
I actually did go there...however the EPA holds a little more weight for me...seeing as how I'm not well versed in Science.

http://www.niehs.nih.gov/oc/news/preddt.htm

You might check out this study from NIH on premature babies and the high DDT count.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Nov, 2004 06:30 pm
One thing which is fairly obvious from what I read is that DDT WAS being overused in the 50s and 60s inasmuch as it was being used as a large area insecticide for crops. Nobody is asking that it be used like that any more. All anybody is asking for is the use of DDT to protect humans and to eliminate obvious mosquito breeding grounds and similar insect health hazards.

Particular insects which attack crops can be dealt with with newer technologies.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  0  
Reply Tue 16 Nov, 2004 06:33 pm
snake guy. In 1971 and 1972 the ability to measure down to the ppm level was just getting started and the ability to measure to ppb was a few years later. The "standard" lab (not rsearch and equip developers) had chromatographs that were laughable by standards of a decade later. So to state that DDT caused no hazards was because they couldnt even measure the stuff and when a fish kill occured they didnt even know whether DDT was involved. Try to use only the latest science. Thats one of the problems of quoting stuff thats 35 years old.

"SCientists state that Earth is center of Universe" -thats a few years earlier I must admit.

BALD EAGLES in PA have made a stunning recovery since 1972 when there was only 2 pair of eagles in thhe state. The egg shell thhhinning was not bullshit, there are many papers that document egg, fetus, and larvae mortality in lots of animals (Thats why it was a great pesticide-The only problem was that it didnt know who not to kill)
Today 2004 there were over 350 nesting pair of eagles in thhe state. Most producing flledglings. You may say . so what , its only animals, people are more important.
I agree to a point, thats why weve doubled the efforts to find better pesticides thhat dont go on killing sprees and do all sorts of collateral damage. We dont spray huge fogs of pesticides on alfalfa anymore, we drip tiny aamounts of specific chemicals that only taarget a single species.
This works in the 3rd world also. If we sprayed Africa , wall to wall with DDT to rid tse tse flies, wed have a natural wasteland with many food animals being wiped out by the chemical, mostly because it interferes with the reproductive cycles of smaller (food) animals.
The junk science web is also anti evolution and stem cell resaerch I believe. Im sorry, Its not a credible source
0 Replies
 
Steppenwolf
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Nov, 2004 06:42 pm
Gunga:

Your argument is logically vacuous. It's utterly irresponsible with respect to establishing causation. The article you cite also fails to make any sort of causal link between the EPA's regulation of DDT and malaria deaths in countries outside of the US.

The EPA does not regulate the use or production of DDT worldwide. I shouldn't even need to make this point, but your argument apparently assumes the converse, much to my amusement and horror. The EPA only regulates the U.S., a country with essentially no malaria deaths. The EPA's ban on DDT has caused no effect on malaria in the U.S. (which is a rare and treatable problem in this country). As this is an American regulation, it does not ban DDT in countries that actually have a malaria problem. In other words, there is absolutely no causal link between Ruckelshaus and malaria deaths. Finally, the legislature could easily change the CWA or any other statutory authority for the regulation of the DDT, so add our legislature and president to your list of alleged DDT mass-murders (even though, as I said, the U.S. regulation of DDT has no impact on malaria).

At this point, my only advice is to drop this argument in order to save face. Rolling Eyes
0 Replies
 
InfraBlue
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Nov, 2004 07:37 pm
My dad's told me stories about DDT and German Cockroaches in Chicago in the 50's.

He'd be able to drench cockroaches in high percentage solutions of DDT, and the cockroaches would still live.

He'd try dunking them in the solution, but they'd die of drowning instead of poisoning.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  0  
Reply Tue 16 Nov, 2004 07:42 pm
DDT is a powder not a liquid, so Id question your dad's veracity.
They had to make it a wettable powder so it could be sprayed in bombs
0 Replies
 
Mr Stillwater
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Nov, 2004 07:50 pm
Why don't we just talk land-mines for a minute.......

You're portfolio skewed to the very profitable small-arms and anti-personnel device manufacturers, g-snake?
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Nov, 2004 07:56 pm
farmerman wrote:


BALD EAGLES in PA have made a stunning recovery since 1972 when there was only 2 pair of eagles in thhe state. The egg shell thhhinning was not bullshit,..



I have a buddy who studied under Heinz Meng and a couple of other leading raptor experts, and he says it WAS bullshit.

Other than that, even if it HADN'T been bullshit, when you're talking about 90 million human lives extinguished and ten or twelve billion avoidable cases of malaria, the raptors are simply not that valuable. In other words, the continued existence of raptors would not justify a price like that, period.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Nov, 2004 07:58 pm
InfraBlue wrote:
My dad's told me stories about DDT and German Cockroaches in Chicago in the 50's.

He'd be able to drench cockroaches in high percentage solutions of DDT, and the cockroaches would still live.

He'd try dunking them in the solution, but they'd die of drowning instead of poisoning.


Only one thing kills cockroaches, and that's boric acid.
0 Replies
 
Steppenwolf
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Nov, 2004 08:10 pm
I still fail to see the link between the EPA's regulatory policy and malaria deaths outside the U.S. (and hence outside of the EPA's jurisdiction). But you keep citing the 90 million figure without addressing this critical short-coming in your argument--that's intellectually irresponsible and dishonest.

Cut and run, or face the music.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
  1. Forums
  2. » The Ultimate Mass Murderer
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 10/14/2019 at 09:28:04