I break people's character down into at least 3 categories:

Bad people often do what's wrong just for their own gratification. I have no use for bad people in any capacity.

Good people usually do what's right; but, often, only because they have to. I will work for good people and let good people work for me. Good people make the world go 'round.

Honorable people usually do what's right (no one's perfect) just for the sake of doing what's right, not because they have to. I will follow the leadership of honorable people and work for them as a subordinate leader. If good people make the world go 'round, honorable people set the pace.

This thread's original question doesn't offer me an option that I'm willing to be content with.

Butter wouldn't melt in my mouth:p

I believe all people are good in nature.

I don't.

I know they are not. Your event set is too small.

cool pics, mrnoodle. The bottom one is very interesting.

I feel that your event set is too small, though, unlike you, I do not presume so much to act like I know. You know nothing of what I have been through or have learned.
Hubris is an unattractive trait.

Technically, her event set cannot possibly be too small. Since you are claiming that all people are good in nature, you should ideally have all people in your set, though most would let you get away with a representative sample; whereas wolf need only have one single person in her set who is not good in nature to prove your set incomplete.

Those pics came from a holocaust site I came across while googling (don't recall the name). The top one is of a group of women -- some with infants -- who have been stripped and are being led to their execution site. The bottom pic is of a group of men waiting to be gassed. There are some emotions that an actor just can't portray -- look at their eyes.

If rk would have said. 'I believe all people are good' ( period ) then maybe I would care to ask what the heck 'event set' means but since people obviously missed the word ' nature' and the phrase 'in nature' modifys the word 'good' I could presume to think he meant people at their core and before any acquired behavior. I think so. I could be wrong. I am not very smart.


Even people that slag off other people he thinks are good at their core.

I don't.

anyway....
Those are some sad photos mr noodle. What I was really going to say in a smart alec way was, only whiteys are ever really bad in the scope of history it seems. :rolleyes:


[I guess I should edit it to include the word 'us' whiteys' ]

That would be babies and toddlers which is the most selfish, self-centered, group I can think of. ;)

Once the spirit is broken color/race no longer exsist. These pics wouldn't have been near as impactive to me had they been in color. Sad? Yes. Real? Even more so.

Take a look at Darfur. It's just as bad there as it has been anywhere.

What whites really perfected was worldwide conquest, so we could do this crap everywhere, instead of just within our borders or with our immediate neighbors.

Ummm, you seem to have overlooked all the African dictators since Idi Amin, which could easily account for another 3-6 million souls, and also the Japanese atrocities since 1900 (how about what they did in Shanghai and Manila) and then top off with the Maoist purges in China and Pol Pot in Cambodia and Laos. I believe that barring little details like our atomic arsenal, the tally is probably higher for murders at the hands of non-whites in this century. Give them the bomb and we will never catch up, darn it :neutral: