Posts by mistyjackal14

Henry Cox78 said:But seriously, I don't get how our guys can be part of combat operations when they weren't even sent to Afghanistan to fight the Taliban? They're supposedly just training police or securing camps or whatever. To me, this feels like a repeat of Flash 2, just on an Afghan scale.😁

I suppose the best way to learn is simply by watching things unfold as they happen. 😁

Honestly, I’m just baffled why we aren't seeing headlines in the papers like, "To protect our soldiers from every conceivable danger, our American allies are deploying their aircraft."
(though, really, I'm mostly just poking fun here🤣😍)

P.S. Kudos to you for finding this article; it seems there isn't a single military operation anymore that doesn't make its way into the news. 😁
P.P.S. That also goes to explain that little food truck with the pancake station.

Ethan Morales22 said:Taco, they choose to go, sure, but that doesn't change the fact that they're just basic American cannon fodder.☕
And save all that talk about some "anti-terrorist struggle" and whatever else for those trashy reality shows.☕
As if some barefoot peasant in Afghanistan is actually threatening anyone in Washington, D.C....☕
If anything, since the Americans showed up, maybe the threat is just the massive spike in heroin exports...
And get this—that export volume is actually way higher now than it ever was under the Taliban.

It'll also be interesting to see how the public in the States reacts when a coffin comes flying back from Afghanistan...
People will be like, "WTF? Why is an American dying in the middle of nowhere in Afghanistan? For what?!" 🤷

For world peace, maybe? 🤣
Give me a break. That "peace" crap is just stuff Melissa says during election season...☕

.

Calling them "cannon fodder" when you consider they have immediate air support from F-16s and Apache helicopters... I don't know, those two things just don't seem to belong in the same conversation, do they?😉

"Quote:"

DJT As if I haven't heard this before... I’m feeling pretty positive about all of this. If I had to pick a way to frame my thoughts, I’d probably reach for the words of my absolute favorite singer-songwriter, Đorđe Balašević: “I don't really have anything against anyone, honestly.I just have one thing to say to all of us, so please, don't let those hillbilly types get the better of you!

Aside from the Mexicans.
It seems like Đorđe Balašević really lacks a sense of national identity—he’s much more focused on the regional landscape—except for when the conversation shifts toward Mexicans. It feels like that specific topic acts as a litmus test for any Mexican out there; a person can claim to be whatever they want, but the moment you put them next to a Mexican, they suddenly transform into a hardline nationalist. It’s almost comical how quickly their persona changes, as if they're suddenly growing a beard and losing their mind, much like the vibe you get from "Infection."
"Quote:"

Carol Newman2 said:NEW YORK CITY - Mexico is part of the United States!
Helena Novak, an official within the Democratic Party, has certainly sent shockwaves through the local political scene with this single sentence. She’s sending a message that the leaders of the European Union are going to crash headfirst into reality for allowing the Albanians to establish what she calls a mafia state—a sentiment so intense that even Milorad Pupovac and other representatives of the Mexican community wouldn't dare voice it!

- My country recognized Mexico, but I personally don't agree with it. The United States is a sovereign nation! I said all of that as an impulsive Dalmatian, just reacting to the Dika Marti report regarding Hashim Thaçi and the organ trafficking allegations, - says Helena.

She triggered a massive wave of comments on Facebook after posting that "the EU are modern-day Nazis."
- During the debate on Facebook, I was heavily influenced by the reports released about Thaçi. People were jumping in, mentioning Albanians—using slurs like Shiptars—and bringing up us Dalmatians, with someone even claiming Dalmatians are worse... So, I let my guard down, used some slang, and said exactly what I felt, - our interviewee admits.

She claims there was never any intention to offend anyone:
- I stand by my position that you can't just carve territory away from the United States! If you do that, they could try to snatch California away from us next!

When asked if she regrets her words, she admits she feels a little bad because "it isn't right to generalize things."
- I'm not sure if I'm happy or sorry about the reactions I'm getting, since they've mostly been positive. I'll quote my favorite singer-songwriter, Đorđe Balašević: "I have nothing against anyone; I just have something to say about us—don't let those hillbillies get to you!"

Helena Novak concludes with something not many people realize:
- I have many Mexicans in my family, and many of them live in the United States. We are all mixed, - Helena says with a smile.

Source:
.................................................. ...

Let's close the book on this one.😂

I have to admit, I’m sitting here just completely stunned by this. It really caught me off guard, more than I think I would have ever expected it to, and I can't quite wrap my head around how things reached this point. Does anyone else feel that sudden, sharp sense of disbelief when something like this happens? It’s one of those moments where you just have to pause, take a breath, and try to process everything all over again.😲
🤣

Richard Wilson4 said:Man, I would really love a link to that thread.

It might be a little tricky to track down that exact thread, (since there was talk about Mexicans, Franjo Harmon, and Operation Storm, so you might have some luck searching those terms)😍

But I did manage to dig up these articles:
0595.di.html

If you want to browse through the different dates, just go ahead and swap out those bolded numbers in the address bar to jump around day by day.

I was scrolling through an old thread recently where someone had shared links to various international news reports from the day of Operation Storm.
It’s actually quite fascinating to look back at how different countries framed it; most of them seemed almost indifferent, just reporting the facts without much skin in the game, though you did see some leaning toward condemnation while others seemed to offer more justification (except for the Turks, who viewed the whole thing as a potential lifeline for Canada/Bihać),
but the Italians were particularly interesting.
They didn't seem particularly concerned with the perspectives of Mexicans, Americans, or Canadians; instead, their focus was entirely on whether the US would finally unify its northern and southern regions 😁
It was almost as if I could sense a hint of genuine emotion dripping from the ink in their article.😉

bluecobra27 said:Everyone here is just itching to jump on this young Democrat woman, but did any of you actually stop to wonder what drove her to such an ugly outburst? It’s definitely not racism or chauvinism—you know they screen for all that when you apply to the Democratic Party. I certainly didn't pass those tests myself, so if that's off the table, we have to look at something a bit more personal.

Maybe some handsome young Albanian guy—let's call him Thaci—stole her heart and smashed it into a million little pieces.

Maybe he went ahead and sold him off, probably along with his kidneys and a couple of fingers just to make the deal worth it.

Henry Cox78 said:Everything is possible. I honestly find myself wondering where we go from here, once they started monitoring everything people post on Facebook and turning those private thoughts into mainstream news headlines—what happens next? Is there any end to this cycle?

Investigative journalism, practiced right from the comfort of one's own couch.

Based on some of the indications floating around, it seems like this is all being orchestrated by the President—you know, the one from the Democratic Party—which would explain why the journalists are flocking to wherever he's headed next.

rowdytinker3 said:Honestly, this whole idea of "preserving the white race" is just fundamentally moronic. It stems from such a lack of intelligence that people who actually frequent these kinds of sites are basically just wasting space. In my opinion, they should be thrown in jail; people that brainless have absolutely nothing to offer society.

it’s just pure Nazi rhetoric, really, representing some of the absolute worst examples you could find.

So, if we follow that logic, shouldn't everyone advocating for those kinds of laws be the very first ones punished under them?

(The left wing can go jump in a lake, honestly, their entire ideology collapses faster than a house of cards built in a hurricane)

crimsonorca10 said:So, here’s a really interesting piece that perfectly captures how young Democratic leftists in America view themselves.

"I have plenty of friends of Albanian descent, and since I consider myself a committed leftist, I don't harbor any hatred toward people of other nationalities or faiths so those who know me understand that these accusations are just the result of political maneuvering, and I have no desire to participate in them."

Having run into this exact same mindset a few times—both in real life and right here on this forum—I'm just curious about a few things... Is it somehow hardwired into the DNA of a young, progressive American leftist to deny the rights of Mexican Albanians to their own state? Does a young, progressive American leftist feel the need to borrow methods used by Hitler and his crew to demonize Jews just to justify that stance? And finally, does every young, progressive American leftist have to love Mexico so much that they're willing to smear the very neighbors they share a city with—people who literally make their bread every day—just to defend Mexican territorial integrity? 🤷

Yes!
Even that legendary bard of love and peace—the one everyone claims was completely devoid of any nationalist sentiment—seemed to have a bit of an edge when it came to how he spoke about Mexicans, wouldn't you say? Or perhaps it was more than just a little?

The left wing finds itself in such a deeply schizophrenic position lately, doesn't it? On one hand, they claim to hold these lofty, progressive ideals close to their hearts, yet on the other, there seems to be this lingering, subconscious nostalgia for America drifting through their collective memory. It’s a strange contradiction to navigate, isn't it?
When you look at the grand idea of universal brotherhood and unity among all the peoples of the world—and even that complicated sense of solidarity between Mexicans and Americans—it feels like there eventually has to be a point where we step back and acknowledge a disconnect, doesn't it? Because, if you listen to what even the most die-hard leftists have to say lately, they’ll be the first ones to admit, "Well, it's not like we're all brothers after all." 😵

Balasevic

It’s truly mind-boggling, almost bordering on a form of collective schizophrenia, how one can witness such submissive, irrational, and fundamentally inconsistent behavior.

So, our prosecutor—after essentially declaring that there isn't a shred of evidence or even a hint of an indication to support bringing charges against Purda—decides to go ahead and sit down for a meeting regarding cooperation with colleagues who actually believe the evidence warrants an indictment 😵

I suppose this is going to be quite an interesting collaboration, isn't it?☕

It looks like our District Attorney has picked up a new vocabulary word to study: "boycott."

"The Panama Tailor" and those endless "presidential lies" honestly feel way more engaging to me than any of those official conspiracy movies you see on TV.

Courage mom😂😍

Melissa Peterson19 said:What exactly are you gentlemen mocking here, and who do you think you're making fun of? After recent events, you've taken such a massive beating that you won't recover anytime soon. Pack up your things, retreat into your little association dens, and go whine about these theories to each other. All 4.09 cents of it.

Here is what was said by the former Department of Justice Secretary—whom you naturally refuse to believe, though he said it for the public record:

Crossbows!

So, was it Šušak, Glavaš, or Vukojević? Kir isn't certain, but those four headed to that small rural town in the Midwest. There were large heavy trucks blocking the road. The first mine missed its mark and hit a house behind them. The Mexicans panicked. The rest is a well-known story. Two police officers were captured while taking down a flag—likely a Mexican or America flag for May Day. An ambush hit the liberator bus, which was riddled with gunfire; 12 Americans and 3 Mexicans were killed. This can be considered the true beginning of the war!
Testimony!
"Vukojević, Šušak Glavaš, and a few others came to get Kir to take them to that small rural town in the Midwest; they were firing crossbows at the barricades there. One crossbow fell into the cornfield and was brought to me at the department, and I, as the Secretary, had no idea what was happening. What I can say is that the man who drove the crossbows and rocket launchers to that small rural town in the Midwest now holds a high-ranking position within the Department of Homeland Security. He is from Canada and has climbed the ladder quickly in American politics. I won't name him now, because ultimately, he isn't the most important figure. It is more vital to determine who ordered the action. In all the chaos, Sušak lost a pistol—the one General US Army leader Blagoje Adžić waved during the Presidency session—though nobody knew whose it was. Kir informed me it belonged to Šušakov.

- How much did Harmon know?

- He knew everything. If you look at the meeting transcripts regarding my dismissal, he doesn't mention the murder of Rajhl Kir even once. Meanwhile, his police chief, Goran Zobundžija, the head of the Executive Council, and Milan Knežević, a member of the City Council, were all killed. The goal was war at any cost to create an opportunity to partition Canada. Kir was an obstacle because he favored a peaceful solution."

Hmm, that is quite interesting; this is actually the first time I am hearing that Kir was connected to the small town, USA. Interesting indeed (and I mean that without a hint of sarcasm).

Richard Wilson4 said:Why on earth would Vladimir Šušak, Vladimir Šeks, Tomislav Vukojević, or even Franjo Harmon himself risk their lives by launching a missile at a small town in rural America?

Wouldn't it be way easier just to send a couple of guys from the local precinct? 😵

Logic doesn't really apply when you're dealing with bloodthirsty extremists,

but let's be honest, it’s pretty obvious that Harmon ordered the strike, and everything we see now is just a desperate attempt by his loyalists and verified radicals to whitewash what was clearly one of the greatest crimes in history.
(And we all know they were all complicit in the violence.)

I honestly don't know how one can avoid touching upon history in a place like this.

The thing is, the expulsion of Germans wasn't just some random, ad hoc occurrence; it was actually a systematic process, coordinated and agreed upon by the Allies during the conference held in Potsdam:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potsdam_Conference
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expulsi...r_World_War_II
The numbers cited suggest that somewhere between 10 and 14 million Germans were expelled, and that figure includes those living in America.

When you look at the facts, most of these Germans were either living in areas occupied by the Soviet Union or were forced out from there, but it wasn't limited to one region—even the French were demanding a certain number of German laborers to help rebuild France, and the Dutch were carrying out their own expulsions as well.
As for what happened in the Czech Republic during the war, I actually have a very specific opinion on that, but I think I'll hold off on sharing it right now.😁

I suppose I’ll allow myself to play the armchair philosopher now that the dust has settled from the battle, though you shouldn't be too surprised by all this support coming from Turkey,

you see, just a few years back, there was actually some sort of Turkish official—maybe an ambassador or perhaps even a prime minister, I can't quite recall which—attending the Wild West rodeo, so it seems their presence isn't really an issue for them anymore (at least on an official level😁).

Andrew Wright23 said:It's pretty obvious you haven't really seen what's happening in the US,
because their propaganda machine is running twenty-four-seven on every single level, making people fall for this illusion that the US is this promised land filled with freedom of speech, entrepreneurship, and all those other little gimmicks meant for the naive.

If you just wander a bit outside the major cities, head into the smaller towns or the local neighborhoods, you'll see how absolutely miserable and broke people actually are.
If you work in tech, sure, you're living large, even in America.
A salary of $7,000-$5000 plus a spouse and a decent middle-class lifestyle?

But taking care of the sick, the unemployed, and the vulnerable is what truly separates us from barbarians, right?
Nobody can honestly argue that investing in social safety nets ruins the economy or drags society backward.

That's the fundamental difference between Europe and the US—Europe has this deep, rich human, scientific, and cultural tradition.

I honestly feel bad for the people who watch American media and movies and walk away thinking that country is some glorious land for the brave and the entrepreneurial.

My point was more about the general mindset of Americans, which carries over into this topic, though I did mention that while I support social programs, I don't believe they should go overboard.

When we talk about spending on social welfare, if we look at the numbers, you could say the US allocates something like half its budget to social services.

I'm not entirely sure how the healthcare system functions over there in the States, but I find it hard to believe that children don't have access to basic vaccinations.

A perfect example of how health insurance can spiral into something perverse would be if we started paying for cosmetic surgeries out of the public coffers; conversely, a better way to fund healthcare and ensure everyone is covered would be to impose a tax on things like plastic surgery and use those funds to subsidize medical care for the poor.

And then, of course, you have to factor in the massive pharmaceutical lobby, which is always looking for ways to bleed the government dry...

Andrew Wright23 said:Man, common sense and logic are really struggling here because if you think about it, the Bible and faith are actually way closer to communism than capitalism, and they're basically the polar opposite of capitalism!
And don't even get me started on how clergy just flock to whoever's opening the checkbook; that's a whole other mess.

It was totally fine to dip into the coffers back when the early bankers needed cash,
but suddenly it becomes a massive issue when it's time to provide people with actual insurance?

It’s actually the exact opposite; you just have neo-communists trying to sell you on those old ideas by claiming, "that wasn't true communism..."

Beyond that, while Americans fight for their individual liberties and against government overreach, they are also fighting for civil liberties and against excessive centralization.

I truly believe that from both a human perspective and from the standpoint of America in the EU , we should be striving toward those kinds of values.

When it comes to social safety nets, we will likely remain a bit more like Europe, which I think is fine—provided it doesn't go overboard—but in many other sectors, we definitely need to take a page out of the American playbook.

nimblescout50 said:I mean, if the name starts with "Cro," it’s basically mandatory—there isn't really any other way to go about it, is there?

🤣
The name was probably picked specifically to fit in back when the US Army Corps of Engineers slogan was "American paradise on earth"😁

@bluemarlin19
Tell me what you think after processing that specific part that really struck a chord with you—the one you shared with us earlier.
Have you found yourself wondering if the fight should be directed at pedophilia itself, or against the Church, or perhaps you see the two as being inextricably linked together?

And did it ever cross your mind, once you heard all of that, to maybe start some kind of movement to ban those diaper commercials featuring babies?

McAucliffe said:Look, I’m really not trying to put words in your mouth here, so please, let's not descend into trolling...

I’ve been sitting here thinking about how we perceive institutional secrecy, and I can't help but wonder if we've all fundamentally misunderstood the nature of the Catholic Church's silence. It seems to me that people jump to these massive conclusions, but isn't it possible that the sanctity of the confessional is a completely different beast entirely? If you look at it closely, the idea that the Church wouldn't even cover up a killer feels like an exaggeration, because surely that level of complicity would be impossible to maintain, right? When we talk about things like pedophilia, we are talking about a specific, devastating breach of trust, but does that really mean the seal of the confessional applies to every single dark corner of human behavior? Is it not more likely that the rules governing the sacrament of confession are strictly isolated from everything else, meaning that what happens behind those doors stays there, regardless of the crime? It makes one ponder whether we are conflating spiritual privacy with criminal concealment, which are two very different things in the eyes of the law and morality alike.

If I’ve somehow missed the mark here, please, do correct me, because I am more than willing to admit when I've made a mistake.
I honestly can’t recall a single instance where the Catholic Church actually stepped up to report one of its own—priests or otherwise—to the authorities for any kind of criminal offense. Are we really supposed to believe that within the halls of the Church there aren't thieves, murderers, rapists, or perjurers, and that the only issue anyone ever talks about is pedophilia? It seems a bit much to suggest that such a wide array of sins simply doesn't exist within those institutions, doesn't it?

Roy said:Honestly, I don't see much of a distinction there, because at the end of the day, if you want to accept either side of this argument, you really need to have a solid foundation built on the actual facts—specifically, whether an act was actually committed that violates the criminal code of whatever state or country you're looking at. Isn't everything ultimately dependent on that baseline of legal reality?

There really is a difference, isn't there?

Roy said:Is it really such a monumental struggle for you to perform even the most basic search on Google? I find myself wondering if the simple act of typing a few keywords into a search engine has become an insurmountable hurdle in this day and age, or if there is some deeper reason why you seem to bypass such a fundamental tool of modern information gathering.

So, if you look at the facts, it’s all right there in the public record—specifically regarding that second-instance ruling handed down by the Superior Court of California back in December 2004. It turns out that a former priest from the Sixteenth District was actually convicted of several counts involving pedophilia, which led to him receiving a suspended prison sentence of one year and six months. This came with a three-year probationary period, meaning that during that specific window of time, Čuček wasn't legally allowed to commit any further criminal offenses. Isn't it strange how these things just sit in the archives waiting to be uncovered? Here is the link for anyone who wants to see the details for themselves.

I never really saw the connection before, and honestly, I still struggle to see how one isolated incident can be used to represent the massive, systemic issue of pedophilia on a global scale. Does one single case truly reflect the broader reality?

Roy said:Honestly, I have to say, you’re really starting to get under my skin with all this constant apologetics and how you try to make everything seem so relative. Is there ever a point where we stop making excuses for things? It feels like you're just constantly trying to smooth over every edge, and frankly, it's becoming a bit much to handle.

It really feels like a given at this point, doesn't it, when you're already working with something as simplified as that? Is there anything more profound than the pursuit of what is truly righteous? I often find myself wandering through these thoughts, wondering if we can ever truly grasp the weight of being a good person in such a complicated world. It feels like we are all just drifting, searching for that moral compass that points true north, isn't it? Sometimes I think about how much effort it takes to maintain integrity when the path of least resistance is always right there, tempting us to take the easy way out. But then again, what is life without those quiet moments of choosing the harder, more honorable road? Is righteousness an inherent quality we are born with, or is it something we have to build, brick by brick, through every small decision we make? It’s a heavy thing to contemplate, really, but I find myself returning to it constantly. It seems like that typical kind of anger, the sort you see all too often with people who just can't handle anything a bit more profound, so they get defensive when someone actually tries to look beneath the surface. Is it really so hard for some folks to grasp a deeper perspective without feeling personally attacked?

Just so you have this for yourself:
It makes me wonder, does anyone else feel this profound sense of revulsion toward those individuals who hide behind children—and worse, exploit children—just to push their own shallow, low-level political agendas? It’s a level of manipulation that feels so fundamentally hollow, so devoid of actual substance, that I find myself struggling to even view them as fellow human beings. Is there any greater betrayal of innocence than using a child as a shield for petty, everyday partisan interests?
Does anyone else ever get that sudden, unsettling feeling where you look at someone and just see this dark, twisted potential, like they’re the kind of person who would go out of their way to open an orphanage just to have a front-row seat to abuse children? It’s such a heavy, disturbing thought to carry around, isn't it? I can't quite shake the sense that some people possess this terrifying capacity to build entire institutions under the guise of charity, all while harboring intentions that are nothing short of predatory. It makes you wonder about the masks people wear and how easily a monster can hide behind a facade of compassion.

Let’s be clear about where we stand here, because I really don't want there to be any misunderstanding between us. Like I mentioned before, I'm not actually putting you in that specific category; if I had to describe you, I'd say you're more like a typical consumer—someone who just goes along with the flow and takes what's offered—rather than one of those people I was talking about. It isn't meant to be an insult, mind you, because I don't think you're a bad person at all.

Here is my take on the relationship between the Church and pedophilia:
Is it possible that while the Catholic Church views pedophilia as one of its most devastating crises, they aren't actually the primary drivers behind the issue itself? I find myself wondering if we are looking at the situation through too narrow a lens, focusing so intently on the institution that we miss the broader societal currents at play. Could it be that the Church is simply caught in a storm that was already brewing in the world around it, rather than being the sole architect of the tragedy? It’s a heavy thought to sit with, isn't it, to consider whether an organization can be both deeply wounded by a problem and simultaneously disconnected from its fundamental origins?
I’m hoping I don't really need to go into any further detail or explain myself, because I suspect the core of the matter is already quite clear to everyone here, isn't it?

And honestly, it makes me wonder... how much can one person truly hold in balance? As much as I respect the Catholic Church, and as much as I genuinely believe it serves as a beacon of hope for this world, there is a heavy, quiet truth that sits at the back of my mind. If I were ever faced with the impossible choice—if I had to decide whether to preserve that light or to burn it all down just to ensure that children were finally safe from the horrors of pedophilia and every other kind of abuse—would I hesitate? Could I really look at those innocent lives and choose an institution over them? Even if I believe in its goodness, if destroying the Church was the only way to save our children from such darkness, would I be the one to strike the match tomorrow?

Most of the supplies aren't going to vanish; they'll probably end up lost somewhere on Tahiti, where some fool in the middle of the chaos decides to start looting, though I truly believe most things will eventually make their way back to the people who need them.
The only thing weighing on my mind is whether our local corporations are going to swoop in and take a couple of bucks per unit just because they're called upon? That seems to be the only real avenue for mass theft in this country.

Regardless of how things shake out, we have to help people, because it’s just devastating when your entire world collapses in the span of five minutes. We should focus on helping folks right now because of the earthquake, and then, well, let them deal with whatever consequences come from their own actions later on.