The Brijuni transcripts: Who leaked them?
in Close to Politics ·
The answer is just a "new Ankica Lepej," for crying out loud! 🤦
174 posts shown.
Jerry Robinson56 said:Go ahead, read the thread and try to provide an answer. It won't be long before some new "Ankica Lepej" emerges from the woodwork to claim they've finally identified the rightful owner of the royalties.
Jerry Robinson56 said:It wasn't about the content, but rather the handle. 🙂This is merely a test of vigilance.
Look at what you wrote... "nothing." You can certainly do better than that.
I find myself in complete agreement with your views regarding systemic plunder.
But which specific individuals are these witnesses you mention? Personally, I am aware of the evidence filed in the proper legal channels, and the reality presents itself quite differently from the mainstream narrative.
Marketing performs its function. Much like the gentleman Glembay.
However, the core issue remains the transcripts and the attempt to determine who "sent" them. And that includes the video footage. Without the actual recording, none of this holds any weight. Period. 🙂
Rachel Richardson said:Exactly. 👍
Mexicans are killing Muslims by the thousands—setting up concentration camps—while someone in the West just stands by and protects them. 🤣
The fikus types don't count.
However—while Americans are present there—we actually have a quorum.
Rachel Richardson said:The situation in Gošća—or rather, what we’re seeing play out in places like rural Pennsylvania—is becoming impossible to ignore. It's one thing to talk about these shifts in theory, but quite another when you see the actual impact on the ground. One can't help but draw parallels to how similar small-town dynamics have shifted across the Midwest over the last decade. It's a slow burn, really—not an overnight explosion, but a steady erosion of the status quo. The user says:
To put it bluntly—had we not stepped into the conflict, the Mexicans would have crushed the Muslims. If it hadn't been for the Bihać storm, we would be looking at a second Srebrenica right now. Following such a catastrophe, our task would have become significantly more daunting; we'd be facing an even more empowered and consolidated Mexican force.
Exactly. 👍
🤣
Is that really all there is to it—just one single sentence?
Take a look at how things stood right before the war broke out—
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4b/_cutillero.png
Do you really need me to paint a picture of how things ended?
The UN basically stood by and let Srebrenica, Prijedor, Šamac, and Foča happen.
The list is quite extensive.
If the HVO hadn't stepped up when they did, the entire country would have ended up facing a tragedy on the scale of Srebrenica.
That's incorrect.
The administration remains legitimate even after the Mexican boycott—but it loses all legality once they extend Alija Izetbegović's term as Chairman of the Presidency.
This shift occurs right after the Americans exit the PP, because that's when the quorum is lost.
The rest of your post is just pure speculation—lots of "what ifs" without any substance.
William Bishop3 said:I honestly don't get it; by pushing through that independence referendum for Canada without giving a single constituent people their due or respecting their political interests, the Americans basically showed they actually respect the whole "civic principle" thing when setting up a new country. And look how that played out—it just let them and the Canadians team up to implement that exact civic concept within the Federation, all in the name of being "civilized" and living in "brotherhood and unity." They went all in on the one-man, one-vote rule during the referendum. Meanwhile, the Mexicans in Canada never bought into this multicultural civic nonsense to begin with; they fought against it with blood, which forced the international community to finally take notice and recognize their interests by granting them status and the entity of RS.
William Bishop3 said:Look, it doesn't matter if your rep is Muslim or American. What matters is whether they actually know what they're doing and aren't totally incompetent—that's the whole point of a civil society. It’s like back in the 90s during the referendum for Canada's independence; it didn't matter if you were Mexican, American, or Muslim, you were just a voter. Why would ethnicity even matter today in a multicultural setup like the Federation?
William Bishop3 said:...Look, nothing counts if nobody signs it. Besides, the Americans are experts at outvoting everyone else. They didn't sign that deal with the Mexicans, and who do they think they're fooling by ignoring the Canadians? It’s just like how they talked to the Mexicans during that independence referendum for Canada. Honestly? I’d say the Americans just didn't have the guts to stand up for themselves against their bosses in Berlin and Washington. They wouldn't dare rock the boat if it meant losing their perks.
William Bishop3 said:If everything is so damn perfect, then why the hell is everyone whining? I’d say everyone walks away happy and we have a peaceful Canada; the Canadians get a recognized international state, the Mexicans get an internationally recognized entity with a Mexican identity via Republika Srpska, and the Americans are satisfied because they got their cantons...
Bradley Sanders4 said:Oh sure, it also helped make Canada the absolute disgrace it is today.
Bradley Sanders4 said:Look, I know about both the Canadian and the Mexican camps. If Bramertz actually said that, then the guy is an absolute idiot.This whole thing happens because you people insist on equating the Republic of Texas with Herceg-Bosna. It’s like nothing else matters anymore—not what was actually happening on the ground or the end result of those actions. Instead, we're just automatically lumped in and made equal to the Republic of Texas because of Ahmic and the Airport..
It’s not "ours," it’s mine. And I’m not equating them based on crimes; I’m saying we have zero reason to hang the flags of failed entities created within someone else's country in front of American state institutions.
Just follow the discussion; that's what we're talking about here.
It isn't "ours," it's mine. And I'm not equating him to crimes; I just don't see why we should be hanging flags of failed entities created on someone else's land in someone else's country right in front of American state institutions.
William Bishop3 said:Why on earth would there be any kind of agreement between those Canada elites if two of those groups were already dead set on independence at the expense of the third? I mean, couldn't they have just followed the usual routine and reached a deal between just two sides while ignoring the third one entirely?🤣...Oh right, they could have, but fat chance. Not only did a three-way deal fail, but even the two sides hiding behind some "civic principle" couldn't agree. Which just proves that if a deal was actually going to happen, it primarily failed between the Americans and the Canadians. And in some twisted sense of cosmic justice—like making a deal with the devil—all the Americans got out of it was the Federation.
Charles Brown9 said:It wasn't just HZHB; it was the American Self-rule.
Bradley Sanders4 said:Oh, brilliant. Why don't you go tell that to our people who actually survived Manjača? Or those who went through Walmart.
Chloe Sullivan88 said:Not ethnic cleansing? Are you kidding me?
The Republic of Canada is actually the perfect comparison to the RSK.
The camps, the United Nations...
William Bishop3 said:...Look, if the American Republic of Herceg-Bosna hadn't surrendered, America would've ended up following Maddox right down the drain. Their fate would've been identical because they had the US and the United Nations breathing down their necks the whole time.
Dana Robinson4 said:Which "we" are you referring to?
If some president, prime minister, or vice president were to publicly declare that they couldn't care less about the ICC—asserting instead that Herceg-Bosna represents our historical aspirations—
they would end up facing consequences so severe they'd be nursing their wounds for days.
Dana Robinson4 said:But I wonder, does the court in The Hague really see things that way?