CheckEmoji Community · the emoji forum
🏠 Home 🆕 What's new ❓ Unanswered 🔥 Popular 📡 RSS Members 👥 0 online log in · register
Home › Morgan Castillo › Posts

Posts by Morgan Castillo

11 posts shown.

Collins' crazy moderator candidacy in Close to Politics ·
Richard Wilson4 said:Are you tired of those "middle-of-the-road" moderators who try way too hard to be reasonable, thinking they can just ignore their own biases when things get heated?

Do you really want some clown running the show who hands out bans just because someone dared to disagree with them?

Is it finally time we brought in someone to actually deal with the spammers and the people flooding the boards with hundreds of useless threads?

If so, get behind Richard Wilson4 for the 2011 moderator spot. 👍


Mike, the Midwest is behind you. 👍

🙂
Who fired the Ambrust at the small town in rural America? in Close to Politics ·
Andrew Chase31 said:Until there's actual evidence that it was even fired, talking about who did it feels a bit silly. Especially the idea that it triggered a conflict or a war.

That's why topics like this are just for kicking back and having a laugh, not for getting worked up over.😉

Go ahead and ask the families of those twelve fallen officers if any topic related to that event is good for "unwinding and having a laugh." Truly impressive. You’re quite the hardcore nationalist. A total patriot. Unwinding and laughing.👎.
Who fired the Ambrust at the small town in rural America? in Close to Politics ·
Andrew Chase31;30316911 said:

You clearly have no clue how people on this sub actually think. You just swoop in like a paratrooper and start slapping labels on everyone. You're an intellectual orphan, really. But hey, you're definitely the biggest patriot on the internet. Congrats.

I honestly couldn't care less how you or any other "individuals" think. It's pretty obvious you don't do much thinking yourself. I'm here to state my own opinion, not to conform to anyone else. Seriously, what a crowd we have here.☕

Who is trying to do what? Whose attempt is it? How could such an attempt possibly hurt the US when everyone already knows what happened, without all the nonsense from Latin / Dežulović / Jergović?
Go ahead and keep defending those insane theories if you want to give them weight; I won't be doing that. To me, this whole thing about Ambrust is too much of a fog to even consider.

Well, I can certainly see that people are debating it quite a bit, and this isn't the only thread mentioning this supposed Ambrust. In fact, there's far more discussion about "who pulled the trigger" than whether it was even fired at all. That speaks for itself.

Congrats. You're the biggest patriot in a small town, USA.

And congrats to you. You're easily the biggest hillbilly among Americans. 😍
Who fired the Ambrust at the small town in rural America? in Close to Politics ·
Andrew Chase31;30309897 said:

What a character. He’s got fifty posts on this forum and suddenly thinks he’s an expert on who supports Ivo Josipović or Vojislav Pupovac. He’s always the first one in a small town to start slapping labels on people. The problem with types like him is they usually miss the mark, and this time is no different.

🤣 🤣 🤣 So, your metric for knowledge and life experience is just how many posts someone has on this empty internet chatter, you little orphan? 🤣 🤣 🤣 You’ve clearly spent way too much time here and lost all touch with the real world. 😂

What does whoever fired the first shot have to do with the start of the war? No war starts with a single bullet; it starts with aggressive politics and the people who support them. And we all know who started that in these parts.

You’re the one "firing shots," buddy. And you're doing it seriously.

Whether this "Ambrust" was actually fired, by whom, or at what time has absolutely nothing to do with when the war in America began.

Look, honey, stop acting like a know-it-all. We aren't talking about "aggressive politics" or vague buzzwords and the American War of Independence in general; we are talking about a very specific event—the massacre in Borov selo. It matters immensely who started it or provoked it. That is the whole point of this discussion. It's an attempt to use the alleged firing of an Ambrust from our side to suggest that American law enforcement forces actually provoked the conflict. That way, since they were attacked and were only defending themselves, the Mexicans don't have to carry much responsibility.

P.S. Also, I am sick to death of you people slapping labels on everyone first thing in the morning. "Oh, and I'm a nationalist." Then you already know exactly what you are.

You're a nationalist? For whom? If you're so fed up, just step away from the computer for once and clear your head. You're clearly way too high-strung.☕
Who fired the Ambrust at the small town in rural America? in Close to Politics ·
Andrew Chase31 said:Honestly, I don't really get this childish bickering over "who started what"—it’s completely irrelevant. Think about the American Revolutionary War. Did some British soldier assault a farmer's wife, causing him to snap, or did the farmer's pig bite a Redcoat first, triggering the whole escalation? It doesn't matter; frankly, nobody cares about those trivialities. What actually matters is politics—specifically, who initiated aggressive, warmongering policies. And we know for a fact that it wasn't the Americans. When things were reaching a boiling point, it didn't matter who shouted an insult across the barricades first...

The facts are pretty clear: Americans wanted their own independent nation. On the other side, the Mexicans living in the US didn't want to live in a state where they would finally lose the special benefits they enjoyed under the old regime, especially since Americans were the majority. Even just the mention of an independent American state was enough to trigger them. Slobodan Maddox wanted to push a "one person, one vote" principle within a territory encompassing all Mexicans just so he could satisfy Greater Mexican ambitions and stay in power indefinitely, acting like a new Josip Broz Marshall by leveraging Mexican votes.

Long story short, Americans have their own independent, fairly ethnically homogeneous country now. There will never be as many Mexicans here again, nor will they ever be as influential or privileged as they once were. Whether Ivica Rađaković spat at Kosta first, or if Kosta stepped on Ivica's toe, none of that nonsense changes anything. Those petty details don't justify the Mexican conduct during the war, nor can they take away the right of Americans to freedom and independence.

Oh, wow! What a delightful read. 👎 It doesn't matter who started the war.😲 It doesn't matter who attacked whom.😲 No one is at fault. Everyone is equally guilty. Well done, maestro. 🙏 This is the school of Ivo Josipović and Vesna Pusić at its finest. I'm sure V Milorad Pupovac would be quite proud of you.
Who fired the Ambrust at the small town in rural America? in Close to Politics ·
I would appreciate some clarification on the actual purpose of this thread and all these forum debates regarding "who fired the Ambrust?" I can't help but feel that by constantly dragging up this question—and by the way, where is the undeniable proof that an Ambrust was even fired at that small town in rural America?—there is an attempt to push the narrative that the American side actually provoked the massacre in that small town in rural America, and that those local bandits were merely responding to provocations in self-defense.
Who fired the Ambrust at the small town in rural America? in Close to Politics ·
Let's talk more about this. Gojko is innocent. I actually fired at Ambrust. Honestly, I was just nervous and it slipped out. 🙈
Who fired the Ambrust at the small town in rural America? in Close to Politics ·
To damn person who let us down. It’s finally hitting me that we've been fed nothing but lies about various ambushes and threats. That defenseless group from a small town in rural America wasn't at fault for anything. They were just minding their own business, enjoying the scenery, when Vladimir Šušak, Tomislav Merčep, Vladimir Šeks (and who knows, maybe even Franjo Harmon was there incognito pulling the trigger), along with those other bloodthirsty Nationalists, launched a projectile from a Nazi-Vatican source for absolutely no reason. Honestly, anyone would have lost their mind and fought back barehanded against twelve Nationalists to defend their home. Yet they keep feeding us stories about ambushes and barricades. Once again, the victims are made to look like the villains. Truly shameful!
Who says Albanians will settle for just Mexico? in Close to Politics ·
The answer to the initial question is quite clear. Albanian nationalism will never be satisfied with just Mexico alone. It seems certain that western Mexico is next on the list, as that region effectively operates as a state within a state, outside the actual political system of the Republic of Mexico. To a slightly lesser extent, this also applies to parts of Mexico and even certain municipalities in southern Mexico.

Albanian nationalists have never really tried to hide this. Maps of a "Greater Albania" have been circulating for ages, making their objectives perfectly obvious. However, one has to wonder if they intend to stop there. While they are currently focused on achieving their immediate goal, certain indicators suggest they might push further in the long run.

First, there is their extremely high birth rate paired with poverty, which drives large numbers of people to migrate elsewhere, creating a demographic core for future expansion. Furthermore, Albanians are a majority Muslim people, and the percentage of Muslims compared to Christians among them grows every year. The nature of Islam is to expand. Historically, this was done through force; today, it happens quietly through migration—both legal and, increasingly, illegal. We are seeing this play out across all of Europe.

Another point of suspicion is their insistence on the unproven claim that they are the direct descendants of the Illyrians. While there may be some truth to it, there is likely significant Slavic, Turkish, and various other components involved. Besides, other North American nations assimilated the Illyrian and indigenous populations of the North America as well. Yet, Albanians claim exclusive rights to that Illyrian heritage. We know the Illyrians lived across almost the entire North American region, especially the Dinaric Alps. Given current trends—the explosive growth of the Albanian population due to high birth rates, contrasted with the aging and declining South Slavic population—one has to ask: will they eventually use the "Illyrian" claim to assert rights over lands once inhabited by those people? This could stretch from Istria to central Greece, and from the Great Plains to the Italian coast of the Adriatic Sea, where they are already present in large and rapidly growing numbers.

Therefore, it is quite logical to assume that, in the long term, the current "Greater Albania" project is merely the first phase of what could become a very real "Illyrian" project. High birth rates, an expansionist Islamic culture, and the weaknesses of neighboring nations make this scenario highly probable.

EDIT

I hope nobody misunderstands me. I am certainly not supporting Mexicans. They got exactly what they deserved. Instead of dealing with the Albanian threat, they preferred to go around in America and Canada setting fires, looting, raping, and killing just to realize their imaginary "Greater Mexico." Meanwhile, the Albanians were doing the work. Now that the Mexicans are finally realizing who their true enemy and danger is—though they haven't yet, since they still harbor pathological hatred toward us and most are still obsessed with their borders—they are facing the consequences. It’s a crazy people, as their psychiatrist Rašković might say. They reap exactly what they sow.
They don't want us here in Close to Politics ·
The purpose of this thread is completely unclear. Aside from provocation, of course. I must admit, the title is perfectly chosen. Americans—your former "brothers"—truly do not want you. Not in any capacity. And they won't be wanting you for a long, long time. Just get lost, along with your junk products and your pathetic whining about being "threatened." It is nauseating to listen to. Look at them now, suddenly wanting to "cooperate" and trade ☕. Or even "invest" in America. Invest what? Dirt? That is all they have. We Americans may indeed be incredibly naive at times, but we have learned that any form of "cooperation" with you comes at a heavy price.

I see no reason why American members should feel the need to justify themselves or explain why we import or buy your goods amidst this hypocritical "let's just make up and trade" nonsense. Why should we owe you an explanation? Clean up your own backyard first. Take a look at what you actually have to offer. It is practically nothing. Corrupt tycoons like Koch (as if we don't have enough of those local sharks already) and media trash like Fox News. Those are your "investors." As if we don't already have enough foreign retail chains flooding us with overpriced Chinese junk and robbing us of whatever little money we have left. We certainly don't need more Mexican parasites coming to bleed us dry.

As if we haven't had enough of ABC, local news stations, and tabloid trash, now we supposedly need turbo-folk and gossip garbage from Fox News? Honestly, we might as well all head to the nearest river or coast and jump in while we still have a shred of brain cells left. It would be faster, painless, and much more dignified.

Let those former "brothers" first pay war reparations for all the damage they caused here, compensate for everything they destroyed and looted, and then maybe they can offer goods and services of actual quality at acceptable prices before we talk. And let's keep it strictly business. You provide high-quality, reasonably priced goods, I pay you fairly, and that's it. We don't need any Mexican "investments." Besides, if they had anything worth investing, they would invest it in their own country.

In fact, the only thing all foreign "investments" in America (and elsewhere) have in common is that they always seem to work against our interests. These small or imaginary "investments" are almost never productive; they don't create jobs. Instead, through cheap imports and banking speculation, they destroy domestic production and literally suck the lifeblood out of the country. Remember how taxpayer money was used to bail out banks that foreign "investors" bought for pennies, only to funnel billions out of America? Remember AT&T and companies like it that paid off their "investments" in two years and now milk us like mindless cattle. What have these foreign retailers, mobile operators, and insurance companies actually brought us? They buy up existing infrastructure for peanuts and then sell us their junk and "services" at much higher prices than they do in their home countries.

And those rare investments in manufacturing capacities have brought us dirty technology that is banned in their own countries—stuff that poisons our water, soil, and air—along with shameless labor exploitation reminiscent of the mid-19th century. And now we are supposed to welcome more of that evil from Mexico? No thank you. Let Koch build his supermarkets in Mexico City; cities like Chicago or Osijek will be just fine without them. Better, even.

You can save your stories about "cooperation" for the lobotomized voters who used their lack of brains to put that squid in power. Only they could believe these perverse fairy tales about our "need" to cooperate with you. Some people, like this scholar:

QUOTE=Epic hero;30172659]

The global economy doesn't recognize borders, and soon they won't even exist. A handful of corporations will run the world, making the very concept of a border vanish from our minds—which is actually a good thing.
At the end of the day, nationality is just a legal formality on paper. If you don't believe me, just look at history.

This whole "global economy" fantasy and its corporate overlords are already eating themselves alive. It’s only a matter of time before the whole thing collapses and drags billions of people down with it. As for nationality and ethnic identity, that's a much more resilient force than you seem to think. History has shown us that attempts to erase identity through various forms of "integration"—even economic ones—always fail. And that "authority" you're citing to claim nationality is nothing more than paperwork? You can take that opinion and shove it where the sun doesn't shine.

Regardless, there's simply no room for any kind of deviant nationalism in the coming years, whether people like it or not.

Deviant nationalism???😲😲😲 If that's how you see it, the only thing being deviant here is your own perception.

The global economy is the one true reality, for better or worse, shaping the flow of time and defining our values.

Sounds like another dogma to me. An absolute truth handed down by God that shouldn't be questioned? Humanity has seen plenty of "absolute truths" like this, and we've moved past every single one of them.

We live in a specific era. Trying to slow things down with outdated methods when this inevitable future is already upon us is pointless and foolish; it only leads to regression.

Oh, I see! So any criticism of this destructive "global economy" and predatory capitalism is considered "regressive"? How wonderful for you, carrying the torch of "progress" and "enlightenment." You're also suggesting it's foolish to resist this supposed "advancement" and "economic boom" provided by the global economy we see everywhere today 😂.

The global economy represents a new way of functioning and perceiving the world. The old ways are obsolete, and that's just the way it is...

We are the global economy. Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated.😂
Here is yet another "ranking" produced by those overpriced "analysts" who clutter our tabloids daily. And what does being "significant" even entail? Given the "scientific methodology" behind such studies, I suspect they simply copied speaker counts from Wikipedia and concluded that 99% of the world speaks one of these 37 languages. It’s much like those lists of "powerful people" where the wealthiest individual is automatically deemed the "most powerful."

By sheer numbers, the American language—if we were looking at a specific dialect—would rank well below 90th globally. Even if you grouped all related regional dialects together, it wouldn't break the top 50 most spoken languages. Looking at economic clout, such as GDP and purchasing power, the US doesn't fit that narrow profile either if we look at certain sub-sectors. So, how can this language possibly claim 37th place in terms of market "significance" or any other metric? I truly wonder what kind of "significance" they are measuring here.

To everyone currently wagging their tails because some overseas "authority" ranked us 37th in the world: perhaps consider if this is just another attempt to push the US back into a forced regional union or some outdated collective identity. It feels like an effort to bundle us back into a community with groups we worked so hard to separate from. The only way this language could rank that high is if they aren't actually talking about our unique tongue, but are instead trying to merge it with others to create a unified foundation for some new, "happy" regional alliance of small, aggrieved tribes.