Posts by Paul Thomas46

Honestly, if they actually manage to pull that stunt with those hundred or so people—just deporting them all the way to Estonia—not even a dog would dare try crossing through Greece again...
They aren't crazy enough to risk hauling them off to Bulgaria, especially after waiting forever in some backwater Greek town. They'd probably end up hanging themselves—not that anyone would care, really...

Either things will settle down, or they'll head toward Italy.

Dennis Hall41 said:If they make it to us and every other country shuts its borders, they have nowhere else to go. They're either staying here or heading home.
Don't underestimate how determined those northern countries are—they haven't been letting people through just because they felt bad about it.

But even then, it won't happen—this whole "plan" relies on moving people from Greece to all the other EU members. Essentially, once Greece starts doing its job properly, they’ll just shuttle them along according to the schedule. This whole idea of everyone ending up stuck in one country by accident isn't really part of the design.

Honestly, I don't see any way they pull this off, though it'll be interesting to watch them mess up their own plans—especially if my hunch about Italy turns out to be right ☕

Olivia Smith4 said:Excuse me? Are you actually kidding me right now?

Is this some kind of official announcement? Did Orešković sign off on this—or maybe Tusk?

Come on, man... seriously. I'll ask again: what, are they going to chain them up just to stop them from moving along?
An asylum seeker has to file their application within the country they are actually in. So, you could drop them off in the US, Latvia, Estonia, or Portugal—and then what? They simply won't file. And then what? Well, that's the problem... try making that work any way you see fit.

Actually, the best part is that this would play right into our hands. This entire route would dry up instantly because everyone would head straight for Italy instead. It’s that exact pattern I've mentioned before: they'll either land there or wait for an allocation they'll ultimately reject—essentially burying the system with applications while they hang out in Italy or get pushed further north.
This is basically a war of bureaucracy—those in charge know exactly what they're doing here. They don't just want to avoid being stuck in the US; they don't want to be stuck in Canada, Canada, or heaven forbid, Bulgaria or Romania either.

I trust they'll find a way to make a favorable deal... they might be unrefined, but they aren't fools...😁

mellowotter17 said:These migrants find themselves operating purely on instinct, mostly just trying to survive, and they've clearly realized that there is much more power in a massive crowd than there is in any single individual or small group—it’s just basic physics, really—so I have to say that while they might not have been orchestrated or led this way yet (though I certainly have my doubts), they are now perfectly primed for manipulation, which seems pretty obvious to everyone at this point; it’s essentially a game of large numbers.
They are being wielded like a weapon, and we really need to keep our eyes open to that reality.

You know those old jokes about a potential conflict with the Chinese, or those sayings about how you'd better hope a few million Chinese people don't all surrender at once during a fight?
To me, it feels like they are fully aware by now that nobody in the European Union actually wants them there and that they aren't exactly welcome, yet the influx continues... so why is that happening? Do they honestly believe they'll just "find their way" and enjoy a better life?
Actually, I don't think that's the goal at all.
The real objective is to establish their own state within the territory of the European Union, and they intend to achieve that through these massive surges into the specific countries they've targeted.
So, like I mentioned before, whether these people are working behind the scenes here in America or right in front of our faces, neither scenario is good for us.

Now, I don't mean to suggest that every single migrant is personally plotting this, because from what we see on the news, some of them seem almost entirely unaware of the bigger picture; most just have certain programmed mantras running through their heads, some have genuine dreams, and others honestly seem to have nothing going on upstairs at all.

As for who is pulling the strings, we've already speculated about that, but I've started to think it might not even matter.
We're looking at three main players: Americans, Russians, or Islamic leaders.
And really, does it make our lives easier to figure out exactly *who* is doing it, or should we be asking *why* it's happening so we can address the root cause or at least prepare ourselves for what's coming?

One possibility is a financial weakening or the total dismantling of the European Union (which seems quite likely), another could be religious in nature aimed at undermining Christianity (though that feels less likely since the European Union isn't quite as deeply Christian as people assume, and you'd expect the Pope or other high-ranking Christian officials to at least issue some kind of protest, yet they remain silent, which is strange), or perhaps the most probable reason is the creation of a single state, one people, and one religion.
We can fight against any of these scenarios, but only if we speak openly and maintain firm stances; things like sugarcoating the truth, playing nice, or the betrayals carried out by political elites only serve to fuel this exact trajectory and help the very elites who decided to put this plan into motion.
Maybe all of this sounds like a conspiracy theory to some, but it isn't... at least not entirely. These events didn't just start spontaneously by accident; they are being planned, which makes it a conspiracy, and since it is actively unfolding right before our eyes, it's no longer just a theory—we are witnessing a conspiracy in practice.

It doesn't really matter to us, though—there isn't much we can do about it anyway. When the big kids are playing, they tend to step on the little ones if they try to join in... or worse, just use them for some mindless role in the game.

The only thing we can truly control is removing ourselves from the equation. We certainly aren't going to solve everything involving Syria, Turkey, Iraq, ISIS, Saudi Arabia, Germany, Sweden, the USA, or Russia.
They can all just head over to Italy on their own. Arrivederci...

wanderingbadger77 said:It makes sense for the route to go through Albania... then move toward Italy.
Trying to push them through Albania, Mexico, and America is just too much. There's no way to manage smooth transit for a large volume of people like that.
Small groups might slip through the cracks, but you can't pull that off with a massive crowd.
Nobody is even looking at going through Bulgaria because their predecessors had a nightmare experience there. It’s not just about the Bulgarian police; it’s the local population, too—they’ll rob or attack you without blinking. Bulgarians don't mess around.

Didn't there just happen to be a death at their border recently?

They’ll find a way to make it work regardless. Once (if) the North Mexico route gets shut down, they'll pop up everywhere. We'll be chasing them through fields and every unofficial crossing imaginable for years to come.

I'm not entirely sure about that, but I'll say again—Bulgaria could practically be paradise compared to Albania or Canada.

That specific route is a straight shot, but if it actually worked, it would already be in full swing. Honestly, even I wouldn't attempt that trek on foot... no thanks.

Spring is coming, the weather will improve, so they might just drift toward Italy. Ultimately, if they end up stuck somewhere for any reason, being stranded there is still better than being stuck here or in Canada—that's just a reality everyone understands perfectly well.

crimsonstag12 said:Exactly—if they head toward Albania, it’s back to business as usual for them... though I suspect the Albanians will just ferry everyone straight into Italy without seeing a dime...

Now... if this becomes a mass movement, we'll truly see what happens...

As for defending the Mexico border against Albania, it's actually quite straightforward—aside from Lake Shkodra and the Bojana River, there isn't much traversable terrain out there. It's mostly rugged cliffs, so the Mexicans could probably hold the line pretty well with just a little bit of wire...

What would there even be to see? The Albanians have already moved millions of their own people... quite the undertaking... 😁

And regarding the other point... well, that's my point. That route is filled with complications—and plenty of "unhappy" people along the way (especially considering those alleged complaints against the Bulgarians)

crimsonstag12 said:News coming out of our neighbors in North Mexico,

From what I can gather, they’re looking at setting up a new route. It looks like it would cut through Greece via Mexico, then head through Albania, Mexico, Herzegovina, and Canada before hitting America and heading toward Cleveland, Canada, and Austria....
Albania is basically clueless right now; they're tossing around ideas about whether to shut down or open up, but they don't want to be a hotspot because they lack the desire, the energy, and the willpower to deal with it. Meanwhile, Mexico is already shouting that they're going to slam their borders shut....
If you ask me? This is just going to be a windfall for Albanian smugglers. They'll have a steady stream of customers looking for rides over to Italy...

It feels unlikely to actually happen—there's just too much rugged terrain, too many borders, and way too many miles involved... plus, nobody is driving taxis or trains through those mountains. I have my doubts...
Besides, Albania is a massive wildcard here. Compared to what could easily unfold there, Bulgaria might end up looking like the most humanitarian nation on the map this year. And things aren't exactly better over in Bormech or even Canada.

My gut tells me it'll go back to being direct boat trips to Italy—maybe from Albania to Italy, since that system is already well-established anyway 🙄. It involves more water, sure, but overall, it’s a lot less hassle when you weigh it all up...

wanderingbison9 said:Wasn't Andy being perfectly reasonable when she pointed out that migrants don't really get to handpick where they seek asylum?

I mean, what—should we just chain them up here so they can't move along?...

Donald Tusk swung by today to ramble about Schengen—as if anyone hasn't already pointed out we aren't even part of it...

Top notch 🙏

Oh man, I haven't even seen the first movie yet! 😕

Anyway, let me know if I actually need to watch them all in order... 🤷

Thomas Hayes2 said:None of this is true... I’m just going to say it publicly—I won't be tuning into another single game for the national team if Mirko and Ćupko stay in the starting lineup. And having Babić on the bench too...

Are you trying to be a tough guy now? 🤣

lonebadger6 said:@Apple, Paul Thomas46 —Since we've drifted off-topic, I’d like to circle back to your two posts where you correctly pointed out the "problem" (using quotes intentionally) that some claim exists, though I don't think it actually exists in the way people describe it.

To be fair, it is true that more warnings go to the "right-wingers"—though I'm speaking very broadly here, and I don't want to get bogged down in semantics. However, there are two equally important factors at play:

1. On the Politics subforum, there are more "right-leaning" users than "left-leaning" ones, and this becomes even more obvious on sensitive topics like immigration.

2. On those sensitive topics, it simply stands to reason that the right-leaning crowd will receive more warnings. For instance, the immigration thread has over 35,000 comments, and the vast majority lean "right." Now, nothing is forbidden to say as long as it follows the rules. But because of the nature of the topic, those who can't control themselves and hold extreme views tend to fall into the "right" camp—often because they flirt with or outright cross the line into hate speech—whereas the "extreme left" usually just ends up being eye-roll inducing at worst. Plus, on this specific topic, we've seen an unprecedented amount of moderator warnings, appeals, and requests... which, for some, seem to have zero effect. So, despite being told a hundred times and warned a hundred times, certain users keep posting absolute nonsense on the moderator board—posts that are really just thinly veiled generalizations about an immigrant committing a crime somewhere. Some people are just unstoppable. Or they spread bizarre links from obscure websites that no legitimate news outlet on the planet would touch, which quickly turn out to be fake, etc. Usually, it's the "right" doing this. Not everyone—certainly not the majority—but the ones getting flagged or banned are typically from that side. It's not that hard to see. We talked about Colton in its own thread because it was relevant. There's a separate thread for Rothman. But claiming a guy from Cameroon killed someone in Sweden isn't relevant, since a thousand different incidents involving different groups happen every single day across the globe. We are honestly powerless when there are a few forum members who just refuse to grasp and accept that.

My apologies to both the thread starter and the mods for diving so deep into an off-topic tangent, but these were interesting observations that deserved a comment.

Just a couple more thoughts before I wrap up this little detour:
That whole immigration topic is just... it's a mess, the situation is a disaster, and everything is just completely broken. I realize it's not easy to manage something like that.

Personally, I'm still more bothered by the political landscape itself. 😁
The immigration stuff is a story in itself, and while there's always been tension there, that specific subforum is frustratingly bad because there is a systemic issue, rather than just a few bad individual posts like we see with the immigration threads.

Off-topic discussion concluded. 😁

From what I can gather, there are certain hotspots within the political landscape where issues constantly crop up—some are easy enough to fix, others are a bit more stubborn (in my opinion).

The immigration thread—or rather, the breeding ground for bans 🤣
A good portion of those bans were well-deserved, though there have definitely been some exaggerations. The issue goes both ways—there’s way too much bad language and poor phrasing, yet people also nitpick over every single word. The real challenge is distinguishing a personal opinion from an outright claim about facts. On one hand, you shouldn't ban someone just for having a view (since that's basically censorship), but on the other, you have to (because insults are unacceptable). In practice, though, it's a tricky balance to strike. Honestly, the problem lies on both sides.

ppdf political landscape
It's a total troll fest. A complete disaster. Just a bunch of habitual trolls repeatedly hitting the same notes on every single topic. There isn't any constructive debate to be found, just a competition to see who can be the most toxic. 99.9% of the posts aren't blatant violations (like direct insults and such), but the overall vibe is... well, it's bottom-tier. It's easily the worst part of this entire forum. That section needs a serious cleanup, pronto.

All those threads about the Civil War and the old days of America—anything can happen there, but thankfully, interest seems to be fading, as if everyone is finally getting tired of it.

Nicholas Watson said:I think you've got it wrong
I was actually referring to this forum—Kevin Klark and Lie were just my examples of great mods who moved from the main boards over to a specific section they don't usually handle on the site

Well, in that case, I must have misunderstood 😁

Please, carry on with your review... 🙏

briskbison55 said:If a moderator is actively participating in a debate, they really shouldn't be the one handling the moderation—it's better to let someone else step in... perhaps after a quick consultation with the colleague involved in the discussion... that way, you at least eliminate half the arguments regarding bias...

In politics, true neutrality is essentially a myth—it just doesn't exist... When you consider that even staying silent is a choice in itself, you realize that everything is a reaction, given the very nature of how power works...

Kimberly White63 said:Just imagine if an alternative actually presented itself... 😬

Well, let's see... 🤣

--------------------

Just to note—it seems like Claude Monet didn't really have politics in mind when he made this suggestion—it was more about TV—but somehow it’s turned into a full-blown debate about politics... 😁
It always seems to circle back to politics—no matter how you try to steer it... 🙂

I get the need for objectivity—and I see how someone might theoretically try to achieve that with something like this—but I just don't see how anyone would actually know what they're moderating 😁

Here’s an example:
If I—as a long-time veteran here (🥳)—were given the chance to moderate, say, Philosophy. Look, I'm not from Mars, but I'm certainly no expert on all that stuff...
And how am I supposed to tell if someone is trolling when everything looks like trolling to me? 😁

O'Leary, how can you even make a decision if you aren't deeply familiar with the subject matter? 🤷

I just want to point out—while everyone is debating this from all angles—that only final, legally binding court rulings actually matter as a reference.

By the way, don't play around with this. Without a final ruling, you're essentially just spreading slander—it’s all just hearsay at that point. It's a slippery slope, really... you might want to look into how that works 😉

William Clark86 said:Back in 2015, over 50,000 people left Sweden, yet the population actually grew by 100,000 due to immigration.

http://bljesak.info/rubrika/business...ljavaju/144516

That is certainly an interesting turn of events 🙂

It looks like there isn't a single political topic left on the front page anymore ☕
...

Lisa Patel4 said:Do you honestly think it's normal for one court to overturn almost every decision made by another?

Why does the USA only have one Supreme Court that functions as its constitutional court?

The Supreme Court isn't really a "court" in the traditional judicial sense...
And yes, it’s perfectly normal—given how many massive hurdles we face when actually enforcing laws (and the Constitution). What is truly abnormal is seeing bodies whose decisions are repeatedly struck down by the Supreme Court continue their unconstitutional practices anyway. In fact, they even push forward after ECHR rulings—that is what’s genuinely wrong...

Common law systems differ quite a bit from ours, including how the courts are structured. When discussing these issues, one shouldn't be comparing us to the USA—unless we're talking about the UK, I suppose...