Hmm, I'm not sure who to vote for. William Wallace helped liberate his country, whereas everyone else just shot people and robbed banks, as far as I know.
Are we comparing them on 'If you met this person in real life' or based on their deeds?
William Wallace did not liberate his country. English stayed in Scotland as they had before. The battle continued after he was gone, for the exact same reason he was leading a battle.
And Scottish will have referendum for independence.
__________________
في هذا العالم ثلاثة أشخاص أفسدوا البشرية : راعي غنم , طبيب و راكب الجمال , و راكب الجمال هو أسوأ نشال و أسوأ مشعوذ بين الثلاثة
William Wallace is overrated...and that's coming from a Scotsman...he won 1 battle...the battle of stirling bridge...got his ass kicked at Falkirk...everything else he did was just skirmishes...
my home city has alot of history from that period though...there's a plaque outside st paul's cathedral in the city centre that says something like "this is where William Wallace struck the 1st blow against the English by killing the son of the English govener of Dundee
anyone interested in it should check out the history of scotland on the bbc just now...
Understatement I am afraid- she was 3 at the time.
But yes, Wallace lost hugely, was effectively fired by the Scots themselves and turned over by a Scot to the English.
Robert the Bruce fared rather better. However, trying to call any of these landed Scottish nobles 'outlaws' is streching it, I feel...
(Not, incidentally, that Scotland is part of England because of some evil military invasion. It was a polticial unification when Jmaes I took the throne, seeing as he was already King of Scotland)
(Not that THAT stopped the final English/Scottish battle at Culloden... which admittedly was pretty frigging evil on the English side, though no sides gave quarter in those days).
Meanwhile the idea of Scottish independence has been dealt a near-mortal blow by the credit crisis- because basically, an independent Scotland would have totally collapsed in it; London is having to bail it out. Amusingly, the ones who wanted independence were holding up Iceland as an example of how an independent Scotland could succeed...
Robin Hood- existent or not- is a candidate for most famous outlaw, I dunno about most dangerous.
__________________
"We've got maybe seconds before Darth Rosenberg grinds everybody into Jawa burgers and not one of you buds has the midi-chlorians to stop her!"
"You've never had any TINY bit of sex, have you?"
BtVS
Last edited by Ushgarak on Nov 25th, 2008 at 02:28 PM
Gender: Unspecified Location: With Cinderella and the 9 Dwarves
Hmm, yeah, most dangerous is a bit ill defined. As is outlaw. I mean, for example you could say that Osama Bin Laden is more dangerous than most of those on that list, and he actually is mostly an outlaw...not saying that he is the most dangerous, just saying it's hard to decide how to even value that. Would you go by kill count, how would you include the fear they created. How about political changes in attitude or even lesser crimes.
that's only partly true...as Scotland contributes a massive amount to the UK and Europe through it's oil industry
but yeah...Alex Salmond and his "arch of prosperity" pretty much sounded the death knell for his independance idea
i personally wouldn't want independance...it serves no real economic or political purpose other than silly patriotism...the majority of Scots would end up far worse off
Yes in this vain I would have to say Genghis Khan. Key words "Dangerous" and "History" and outlaw to anyone who wasn't of the Mongol tribe. He was ruthless. There is Historical evidence (Written accounts and archaeological) that he slaughtered 100's of thousands that didnt capitulate and, the only thing that kept him from slaughtering 100's of thousands more in Western Europe was his death. So my vote is...... Temujin A.K.A. Genghis Khan .
Then you have:
Adolf Hitler, Deutchland
Kim Jung Ill,Korea
Pol Pot , Cambodia
Mau tse Tung, Chine
So what are the parameters? World Law? Local Law? or just the people you mentioned in the pole?
If thats the case I would have to say,
Jesse James
__________________
"To the last, I will grapple with thee... from Hell's heart, I stab at thee! For hate's sake, I spit my last breath at thee!" - Khan (reciting Melville)
Oh for sure, Scotland contributes loads, though that's an intensly complicated area.
The whole point of the Union is that we acheive far more together than apart. I've never quire understood the point of breaking thar up for what you so rightly cal silly patrotism
Heck, even Cornwall talks about it sometimes. Gah.
Anyway, yes, so shall we define this as 'outlaw people were the most scared of' then?
__________________
"We've got maybe seconds before Darth Rosenberg grinds everybody into Jawa burgers and not one of you buds has the midi-chlorians to stop her!"
yeah all this talk of regional government...all it would mean is more beauracrats and more taxes....we already have the UN, European Union, Westminster (and in Scotland's case Hollyrood) making laws...Wales has their assembly and Northern Ireland has Stormont...then there's local councils too
utterly pointless and huge wastes of money for the most part
but yes...uuhhh...most feared outlaw?...Keyser Soze
KMC Community Forums
Sep 7th, 2007 04:31 PM
