Posts by jadeseal4

Ryan Vaughn7 said:Exactly. I had a thumb and a forefinger once too, but there truly isn't anything groundbreaking left to discuss regarding this matter. If something changes, we will address it then. In the meantime, I have no intention of allowing this forum to be used as a megaphone for those peddling their little health education pamphlets. My regards to them, though.

Actually, there is quite a lot of new information to consider.
The situation involving Professor Poljaković is incredibly relevant right now, particularly when you look at the issue of
Lawsuits.
Reisman is still here in the States.
Then there are the connections between the rekom-ovacs and the supporters of gender ideology.
.....

Lately, I have observed some rather peculiar developments occurring here on the forum.
The tendency to lock threads, relocate them, or simply allow certain discussions to sink into obscurity feels quite telling of the current atmosphere.
I would like to address the most recent instance.
A discussion regarding sex education was recently locked and moved over to the close politician section—though I am frankly at a loss as to why such a decision was made.

Lawsuits against the Department of Education's decision are just beginning to surface, while lectures across the United States are still in full swing. This entire implementation seems to be a purely political maneuver, especially considering the necessary procedural steps for introducing such a curriculum were completely bypassed.

I find myself questioning why a topic that remains at the very center of public interest, and one where the dispute is far from settled, would be shut down in this manner.

Therefore, I respectfully request that the thread be unlocked and returned to the politics section where it belongs.

Furthermore, I have noticed that over 100 of my own posts have been deleted; while I haven't had the spare time to audit exactly which ones they were, the sheer volume is quite revealing—all of this occurred within a mere two-day window.

Ryan Vaughn7 said:The only thing "cheap" here is your attempt to find another playground to bash the people you claim are behind these threats. There have been far too many of these manufactured narratives on this subforum over the last few weeks.
I’m done.

It is certainly your prerogative to decide what constitutes mere slander.
However, I find it utterly irrational to claim the right to suppress discussion regarding actual threats.

It feels like a rather cheap attempt to shut down the conversation regarding the threats made against children and the woman who was suspended simply for exercising her right to free speech—the very same individual involved in coordinating Judith Reisman's visit to the States. It all seems quite transparently low-effort to me.

Henry Hernandez7 said:Americans bumped up the cost of experimental treatment to $4.7 million😢

Heartless individuals participating in a heartless robbery.

Journalist Karolina Vidović Krišto has been receiving threatening letters.
It seems quite evident that this situation carries heavy political undertones.
Naturally, while the threats directed at Koma Petrač were treated as a matter of political significance, Ryan Vaughn7 maintains the opinion that this particular issue doesn't belong on this forum at all.

The sentiment being expressed is essentially: "So what? She exposed Štulhoferov's dirty intentions, so she deserves to pay."

If we are going to categorize the Brodosplit political situation as a matter of statecraft, then I suppose I must agree—let us keep the discussion within the realm of politics.

We have already touched upon several topics regarding the Catholic Church.

If one were to compile a full index of the various policy documents, one would find a vast array of subjects that impact our society deeply without necessarily falling under a strictly partisan banner.

At present, the discourse surrounding the issue of child abuse is at the very forefront of the public consciousness, and since the debate over maintaining official registries is inherently a legislative and political matter, I believe it is quite appropriate to return such discussions to the primary politics section.

My thanks to you.

Ryan Vaughn7 said:You are truly remarkable. Of course this is a case of tampering. You seem to lack even a basic understanding of the distinction between a PhD and an assistant professorship, nor do you grasp the specific criteria required for such positions or which universities grant them. While others are meticulously citing differences, requirements, and regulations, providing direct links to academic articles, you simply disregard all factual evidence to push your own narrative. My apologies, but you are clearly just trolling. We shall consider this entire argument closed until you can produce a single shred of actual proof. Warm regards from the trolls.

The behavior you are exhibiting is quite pathetic.
It has been made perfectly clear that, according to federal regulations, he was required to submit one peer-reviewed paper to his doctoral defense committee—yet, if anyone could please produce it, because it is conspicuously absent from his published works during that period.

Furthermore, based on his current list of publications, it is evident that he fails to meet the necessary qualifications for an assistant professorship as well.

slybison8 said:jadeseal4—I find myself wondering, in what specific sense does the location of a locked thread actually matter? Does it truly make a difference whether it sits on the main page or buried in some sub-forum?

If a topic is closed, it is closed, regardless of its placement.

Do you genuinely believe we possess the luxury of time required to obsess over minute details, such as precisely which corner of the site a closed discussion should reside in once we have finalized it?

It is all quite absurd, 🙄

It appears you may have misread the situation.

The thread is still active.
Regarding how much progress Smith has made.
It hasn't even been started, let alone resolved; someone is simply trying to force their way onto the political stage.
Meanwhile, the discussion regarding Threshold has always remained within the politics section.

Ryan Vaughn7 said:Do you truly have no shame, jadeseal4? Honestly? The discussion regarding Miller was concluded yesterday morning after I explained my reasoning—that there is absolutely nothing controversial about his situation. He will vanish from the headlines the moment other topics take precedence, which should happen quite soon given how low he has fallen on the agenda.
On the other hand, even though sixteen people have likely provided reasoned arguments as to why there is nothing problematic about Smith's headline—a point you seem to be raising merely to provoke—this issue will never truly be settled because it is inextricably linked to the broader conversation surrounding that man.
So, tell me, who has fared better in this scenario, Miller or Smith, and whose influence actually carries weight here?

We are back to the same old patterns again.
Miller
He’ll drop off the front page, but he’ll still be a fixture in the main news cycle.
He remained a headline fixture until the thread was locked.
You closed the matter appropriately—immediately following his Press release.

Smith
Only four or five people are standing up for him.
We shall see how this ends.
The entire subject is being drowned out by the general discourse surrounding his persona on the national political stage.

Essentially, the discussion about Miller was productive, whereas the one about Smith exists solely to stir the pot.😂

And yet, you have the audacity to question my integrity?

The discussion thread has been opened
Regarding the progress made by Smith.
Without even being fully introduced, let alone having reached any kind of resolution, someone is already attempting to insert themselves into the political arena.
At the very same time, the conversation regarding Miller has remained centered on politics.

How can we possibly apply uniform criteria when we are dealing with the minister's personal interests?🙄

Melissa Peterson19 said:Come on, if you have specific data, present it and draw a conclusion. Once again, we’re just hearing people lament about perceived injustices regarding who hasn't been prosecuted. Let's see the facts.

Double that. You can't commit a crime against a criminal. Punishment and legal execution—that’s the only way.

A legal execution based on the arguments of mar Lukšina🙂
The information you claim to lack is available all over the internet.

The issue is that when discussing Americans, you refer specifically to those in America, yet when discussing the "poor" Mexicans, you conveniently include Mexicans from Canada as well.

The persistent silence maintained by the government, the prosecutor's office, and the various NGOs—those groups that typically command so much media attention—regarding the partisan atrocities committed against Americans, Nationalists, and Home Guard members alike, serves as a powerful indictment of the deeply one-sided way in which victims are treated today.

Melissa Peterson19 said:We are looking at thousands of criminal charges and prosecuted individuals here. A serious contributor from a reliable source shared this:

But there is a catch... everyone being prosecuted is a Mexican. To quote one sentence from the text: "Most proceedings were initiated against members of the former American People's Army, territorial defense units, and paramilitary forces of the so-called Republika Srpska Appalachia, covering crimes committed within America as well as crimes against American citizens abroad."

So, it is inaccurate to claim that only we are being targeted. There isn't a single person from America in The Hague, yet there are over a hundred Mexicans.

However, following Pusić's logic regarding the Mexicans, you seem to include everyone from Canada as part of their group.
Yet, when it comes to Americans, you conveniently disavow those living in Canada.
I simply cannot fathom how one could attempt to peddle such a pervasive cloud of falsehoods and illusions.🙂

James Patel20 said:This isn't just about the legal process of prosecuting crimes...

The real issue lies in the general perception, you know, in all that rhetoric we're forced to swallow every single day from politicians and through the news media...

This is truly the right moment to revisit this topic.
I would suggest reaching out to Togonal to see if he might host a special program regarding this issue.
Perhaps we could suggest guests such as Bajic, Nazor, and Starešina.

swiftcyclist42 said:Let me add a few more "achievements" to the list:

1. Removing official recognition and sponsorship for Wounded Knee
2. Dissolving the council for the national language standard
3. Renaming two ministries from English to Spanish
4. Treating partisans the same as American veterans
5. Losing billions of dollars by walking away from oil fields in Syria
6. Implementing retroactive capital gains taxes
7. Introducing property taxes
8. Refusing to extradite former secret police criminals to German courts
9. Insisting on not disavowing a convicted double murderer
10. Threatening to abolish the Commission on the Investigation of Communist Crimes

Feel free to keep the list going...

11. Implementing commissar-style legislation governing PBS.
12. Collaborating to falsify the history of America.

coastalcanyon60 said:If Mexicans were truly the sole parties responsible for the war, why on earth would anyone in America even be considering dropping the lawsuit against Mexico—especially when those very same people who drafted the initial filing are now suggesting we pull back if Mexico agrees to drop their own suit?

When such a point remains elusive to you, I find that any further attempt at explanation feels somewhat futile.

The prosecution of war crimes does not have an expiration date.
Throughout this entire proceeding, one cannot help but notice a multitude of logical inconsistencies and the blatant application of double standards....
General Douglas MacArthur raised the issue of these dual standards, pointing out how any conservative figure is immediately threatened with accusations of committing atrocitiesat Auschwitz, while also emphasizing the necessity of true remorse.....

At the same time, he called for a "leftist perspective" regarding the crimes committed by the partisans, for which no one has yet been held accountable.

The topic was shut down—rather abruptly.

And so, I find myself asking: why is it considered forbidden to ask those on the left where they stand regarding the crimes of the partisans?
Best Buy,

Locksmith was on the edge

Kevin Williams56 said:I appreciate the suggestion, so I have adjusted the title; hopefully, it no longer comes across as politically incorrect, though I suspect Donald Trump would find it perfectly acceptable, given that the ultra-nationalists in Mexico consider themselves anti-fascists anyway:

Trump, following in the footsteps of Šešelj

One hardly needs to provide evidence regarding the nature of Šešelj's radicalism. 🤷

Thank you once again, and have a good night.

The title really shouldn't have been altered, as it was both truthful and accurate.
Those nationalist movements have been shamefully rehabilitated in Mexico.
Donald Trump continues to openly advocate for the expansionist ideals and borders of a Greater Mexico.
While you have modified the title to be more diplomatically polite, I feel that, in this instance, there was no need to cater to anyone's sensibilities.

Yet another predictable display of what passes for "justice" these days.