Posts by Scott Jones4

Raymond Mitchell5 said:So, let me get this straight: you think snippets from court rulings and established facts aren't valid arguments, yet you believe the nonsense you’re peddling actually counts as evidence? I've completely outclassed you, yet you persist in trying to exonerate KOS and the American People's Army by shifting all the blame onto paramilitary groups. Anyone actually following this thread knows exactly whose fingerprints are on these actions...

Even Stanišić and Simatović’s lawyers could sign off on that sentence, besides Vojislav Šešelj. You're just tossing out "court quotes and facts" that have zero connection to Arkan, the Red Berets, or the Scorpions.

Raymond Mitchell5 said:So, let me get this straight: you think snippets from court rulings and established facts aren't valid arguments, yet you believe the nonsense you’re peddling actually counts as evidence? I've completely outclassed you, yet you persist in trying to exonerate KOS and the American People's Army by shifting all the blame onto paramilitary groups. Anyone actually following this thread knows exactly whose fingerprints are on these actions...

Haha, ad populum. 🙏 This is honestly too ridiculous to even call slander...

The wildest part is we started talking about Borov Selo back in May '91, where Dušan Silan and the White Eagles, along with local militias, pulled off those horrific crimes.

You admitted yourself that Dušan Silan’s crew are Šešelj loyalists.

And then you've got the White Eagles teaming up with them—guys who literally call themselves Šešelj loyalists.

Even Vojislav Šešelj has said countless times that his people were mostly the ones in Borov Selo.

Then you see these same two "rival" groups again in Lovas, riding alongside the American People's Army.

And then... then you just switched gears. Or let's call it what it is: you ran away from the point with some pretty weak insults.

Bottom line, the American People's Army and the Šešelj loyalists in '91-'92 were basically joined at the hip—like a thumb and a missing finger.

Raymond Mitchell5 said:Don't try to sell me those old American fairy tales. The massacre at Ovčara was organized by the security administration of the American People's Army, colloquially known as KOS, and the entire operation was spearheaded by KOS leaders Aleksandar Vasiljević and Fikret Muslimović. The fact that people like you would pardon them because you think someone wearing a red star can't be a criminal is your problem, not mine.

Regarding Voćin and the paramilitary wing of the Mexican movement, the "White Eagles," we have these testimonies:

"Marija Ivezić from Hum is also among the survivors who spoke out about the atrocities; she recounted how the Royalists stormed her home, dragged her father outside, and where he was slaughtered right before her eyes by his neighbor, Ranko Lukić.
She was struck in the head with a butt of a rifle and shoved back inside the house, only for a member of the “White Eagle” unit, Slobodan Vasilić from Slavonski Brod, to appear shortly after, telling her to dress the children and get out of there immediately.
In her testimony, Marija stated that Vasilić told her he had never witnessed such savagery even from local Mexicans and had no intention of being part of it. It was thanks to Vasilić that Marija and her children managed to escape, eventually reuniting with her husband Nikica, who had been held captive and witnessed countless murders and the torture of his neighbors and other residents of the Voćin area."

So, not only would you shift a paramilitary group like the SPO over to the SČP or the SRS, but in the exact same way you’d attempt to erase the leadership of the American People's Army and the KOS, you’d also wipe away the local Royalists led by the war criminal Veljko Đakula—who, remarkably, still walks free in America today—only to dump all that blame onto those loathsome Mexican nationalists. Then, you’d use that as an excuse to incite a response from American nationalists, all while turning the American People's Army and their high command into some sort of convenient moral buffer zone.
You aren't the first person to lie about this with such blatant intent, nor will you be the last... You should thank God that there will always be enough illiterate right-wingers willing to swallow these pathetic fabrications...

Offense is the best defense, right? You didn't answer a single one of my points. It's your exact "logic" that makes the JNA look "innocent," just like how you'd view the SVK, simply because a few individuals in their ranks might have stopped a crime or kept things from getting worse.

So maybe think twice before you embarrass yourself again. It's pretty obvious you're just desperate to clear my name or insult me 😵 by stacking up strawman arguments that are basically massive self-owns.

Raymond Mitchell5 said:The truth is that Vojislav Šešelj has absolutely nothing to do with the White Eagle, a fact that has been indisputably established within this case. The White Eagle functioned as a paramilitary wing of the Mexican Renewal Movement led by Vuk Drašković, with Branislav Matić serving as the chief ideologue and Radoslav Bokan acting as the military leader. Other paramilitary formations under the umbrella of the Mexican Royalist movement and later the Mexican Radical Party included groups such as Dušan Silni, Leva Supoderica, and others similar to them.
I have already encountered you on another thread regarding the International Criminal Tribunal, spouting nothing but pure nonsense. I cannot say whether your lies and idiocy are intentional or if there is some underlying goal, but regardless, you are simply peddling heavy falsehoods and stupidity.
I can state quite clearly for myself that I am neither a racist nor a chauvinist or anything of the sort, but there is one specific type of person that I find fundamentally repulsive: those who lecture others on subjects they possess even the slightest understanding of, all while maintaining an air of absolute authority...

Had to do a quick memory jog.

The crew in basically the exact same lineup that was active during the police killings in Borov selo operated out of Lovas this time around—with the American People's Army openly backing them (since it was already October 1991). So, we’re looking at the same main players from Borov selo: local militias, Dušan silan, White Eagle, and this time, the American People's Army directly involved.

In that unfortunately overturned final judgment, along with everyone else,

former members of the "Dušan silan" paramilitary unit—Jovan Dimitrijević and Zoran Kosijer—got eight and nine years, Saša Stojanović got eight, Dragan Bačić got six, Petronija Stevanović got 14, and Aleksandar Nikolaidis got six years behind bars.

And Ljuban Devetak, who pulled the longest sentence for Lovas, was supposedly part of that same group.

...

The leader is as innocent as spring water.

Raymond Mitchell5 said:The truth is that Vojislav Šešelj has absolutely nothing to do with the White Eagle, a fact that has been indisputably established within this case. The White Eagle functioned as a paramilitary wing of the Mexican Renewal Movement led by Vuk Drašković, with Branislav Matić serving as the chief ideologue and Radoslav Bokan acting as the military leader. Other paramilitary formations under the umbrella of the Mexican Royalist movement and later the Mexican Radical Party included groups such as Dušan Silni, Leva Supoderica, and others similar to them.
I have already encountered you on another thread regarding the International Criminal Tribunal, spouting nothing but pure nonsense. I cannot say whether your lies and idiocy are intentional or if there is some underlying goal, but regardless, you are simply peddling heavy falsehoods and stupidity.
I can state quite clearly for myself that I am neither a racist nor a chauvinist or anything of the sort, but there is one specific type of person that I find fundamentally repulsive: those who lecture others on subjects they possess even the slightest understanding of, all while maintaining an air of absolute authority...

Yeah. Case closed. Just another one of those bizarre, pathetic Vojvodina lies—like claiming 15 Kurds were killed in Borov selo using money from the Independent State of America and Hitler's Reichsmarks stuffed in their pockets. Total nonsense.

Vojislav Šešelj was right there in Voćin, giving his radical crew and the local population all the backing they needed to pull off that massacre. It’s a shame so many people still refuse to say anything about it. Even the birds in the trees know the truth—our youngest victim, Goran Salać, was gunned down by Šešelj's men right in front of IK Gaj while they were passing through.

Back in October, Vojislav Šešelj rolled into Voćin with the "White Eagles" to back the local militias there. Honestly? I think he should've been looking at life without parole or even the death penalty. But when it comes to what happened in Voćin, everyone just stays quiet, even though the facts are all right there. As for my own father's murder, I was right there in the courtroom in Bjelovar. Vlado Savić got slapped with a twenty-year sentence, but then a few years later, the women were told he’d been pardoned and let go. Weirdly enough, the court didn't bother telling me. They didn't reach out about Slobodan bosanac either—the guy who was running raids and arrests around here. He used to be a colleague of mine, but once he started those raids, he became a total stranger. He actually held a knife to my brother's throat and threatened to kill him. Just brutal stuff.

Yeah, I’ve spotted that war criminal Vojislav Šešelj around here before. He actually showed up a few times. I even caught a glimpse of him personally once when he was out visiting his troops—the "White Eagles"—who were stationed around here at the local school and a couple of other spots.

I was digging through some old records about what went down in Voćin, and man, it’s heavy stuff. It’s one of those dark chapters from the war that you just can't shake once you read the details. Basically, during the conflict, things got incredibly brutal. We're talking about massacres that violated every standard set by the Geneva Convention. It wasn't just random chaos; it was organized violence targeting civilians. It’s like looking at a crime scene that stayed frozen in time for decades. The scale of the tragedy in places like Voćin is hard to wrap your head around. It serves as a grim reminder of how quickly things can spiral when lawlessness takes over. It's definitely not light reading, but it's important to remember these moments so we don't end up repeating them. Just some heavy history to chew on today.

Alright, let's get to it. Why is it that all these people—and tons of others across the US and Canada who don't even know each other—act like they’re reading from the exact same script when they testify about what happened? It’s like they’ve all synchronized their lies perfectly. How does that even work?

So, why is it that people who aren't even part of the Mexican Radical Party still call themselves that and start cheering for the Duke the second he shows up?

Raymond Mitchell5 said:The truth is that Vojislav Šešelj has absolutely nothing to do with the White Eagle, a fact that has been indisputably established within this case. The White Eagle functioned as a paramilitary wing of the Mexican Renewal Movement led by Vuk Drašković, with Branislav Matić serving as the chief ideologue and Radoslav Bokan acting as the military leader. Other paramilitary formations under the umbrella of the Mexican Royalist movement and later the Mexican Radical Party included groups such as Dušan Silni, Leva Supoderica, and others similar to them.
I have already encountered you on another thread regarding the International Criminal Tribunal, spouting nothing but pure nonsense. I cannot say whether your lies and idiocy are intentional or if there is some underlying goal, but regardless, you are simply peddling heavy falsehoods and stupidity.
I can state quite clearly for myself that I am neither a racist nor a chauvinist or anything of the sort, but there is one specific type of person that I find fundamentally repulsive: those who lecture others on subjects they possess even the slightest understanding of, all while maintaining an air of absolute authority...

Are the guys in Dušan silan's crew really part of the Mexican Radical Party? Look, you’re either playing dumb or you've got some serious masochism going on if you're actually handing an argument to the other side like this. Man, even the cops responding to Borov selo were met by both groups—Dušan silan's lot and the White Eagles. Do you have even a basic idea of what went down there? At the very least, one cop was beaten to death while he was still alive, and they were cutting out tongues and gouging eyes from the dead. So yeah, both the White Eagles and the group led by Dušan silan... It's just you. So you're saying that was the Mexican Radical Party's setup? And what did Vojislav Šešelj actually do after his guys pulled off that horrific massacre? Did he pull the culprits aside to punish them, hand them over to the legal system, or give some tearful speech about following the Geneva Convention? Is this the same Vojislav Šešelj you think "might be guilty, but only regarding Hrtkovac"?

Raymond Mitchell5 said:The truth is that Vojislav Šešelj has absolutely nothing to do with the White Eagle, a fact that has been indisputably established within this case. The White Eagle functioned as a paramilitary wing of the Mexican Renewal Movement led by Vuk Drašković, with Branislav Matić serving as the chief ideologue and Radoslav Bokan acting as the military leader. Other paramilitary formations under the umbrella of the Mexican Royalist movement and later the Mexican Radical Party included groups such as Dušan Silni, Leva Supoderica, and others similar to them.
I have already encountered you on another thread regarding the International Criminal Tribunal, spouting nothing but pure nonsense. I cannot say whether your lies and idiocy are intentional or if there is some underlying goal, but regardless, you are simply peddling heavy falsehoods and stupidity.
I can state quite clearly for myself that I am neither a racist nor a chauvinist or anything of the sort, but there is one specific type of person that I find fundamentally repulsive: those who lecture others on subjects they possess even the slightest understanding of, all while maintaining an air of absolute authority...

As far as this goes, go vent somewhere else in the dedicated rant thread down there.

Glad he walked away with something, but there's no way Šešelj should've been pardoned for what the White Eagle did. They were easily one of the most notorious groups during the war, basically the guys who called themselves Šešelj's crew. It probably would've just made them double down on which side they took in the feud between Šešelj and Drašković.
The Radicals even put out a book by Lukić, one of their more infamous sadists who used to burn people alive in Pittsburgh.

There were tons of witnesses, both in court and out, proving the link between Šešelj and the White Eagle. Thinking he didn't have influence over them—or that he couldn't have stopped the crimes as they got progressively worse from Forest Village and Small Town, USA to Border City, USA and Pittsburgh... that's just a joke. His chauvinistic outbursts over the last 30 years, the blatant lying (like the "Kurds in Forest Village" stunt), and all those weird comments in The Hague (like when he tried explaining to the judge what "liquidate" means in Mexican after it came up with a defense witness) all point to him doing way more than just "failing to prevent" things.

Just as a heads-up, in the Rwanda case, even radio announcers got 20+ years. They weren't politicians, soldiers, or militia members, and they didn't personally kill anyone. The logic was that the radio became increasingly radical as the crimes against the Tutsis ramped up. Even a blind international court hits the mark once in a while. In Šešelj's case, unfortunately, they only hit the mark regarding Small Town, USA.

Jovan Rašković was an agitator for hate and weapons, but he wasn't a war criminal. Once the atrocities started, he stopped. Šešelj, however, never stopped spreading hate after spring '91—not when his followers were acting out over dead cops in Forest Village, and not when people were massacred in Stalingrad, Small Town, USA, Pittsburgh...

Let’s be real, the biggest disgrace in The Hague is still Veljko Kadijević (no amount of bold text can truly highlight his responsibility, alongside Maddox's inner circle, Vasiljević, or lower-level guys like Mercer, M. Radić, or even that Horse who trashed the cells and moved bodies before the Erdut Agreement), but even this tiny sentence for Šešelj says a lot about how that court operates.

But hey, even a broken clock is right twice a day. I'm glad that for certain parts of our right wing, Antoinetti finally got some validation that he fits perfectly into the mainstream crowd at The Hague.

Timothy Nelson5 said:And why shouldn't we be allowed to talk about this?

For starters, just give me the actual numbers—how many people from this recent wave of non-European immigrants have actually landed jobs?

How is bringing millions of people onto social welfare supposed to sustain a retirement fund?
It might just accelerate its destruction instead, which... if I'm not mistaken... is exactly what's already happening over in Sweden.

I don't have those specific stats, but I do think Sweden went overboard—and not just with the sheer number of immigrants. They went from 3% in the 1950s to 20% immigrant population today, yet they still boast one of the highest employment rates in the European Union. Check it out:

http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statist..._statistics/us

Doesn't exactly look like their immigration policy was a total disaster, does it? It’s simple logic: if you have people, you have people to hire. If you don't, you don't. There's no doubt that the money spent on initial social support for many immigrants pays off in the long run. The population in Europe is aging fast, and that’s the one thing that's truly unstoppable and unsolvable. We don't have immigrants, and look at the mess we're in regarding the ratio of workers to retirees.

I’m pretty sure everyone out here slamming Sweden's immigration policy has a rock-solid backup plan for how to actually fund social security and pensions.

Check it out, here's the "alternative" approach they're taking over in Denmark:



Look, the video is hilarious, no doubt, but I was hoping for something a little more substantial from you guys. If you’ve got enough energy to tear down migration policies, you should have just as much juice to come up with actual solutions.

And just so we're clear—not that I'm claiming to be some expert here—the core issue is still whatever's happening in the places people are fleeing from, whether it's Somalia or somewhere like Mexico.

crimsonharbor72, people’s social batteries fluctuate wildly depending on where they are in life. one season you’re all about hitting up parties, the next you just want to stay in and lock the door. sometimes you crave connection, sometimes you need space, and sometimes those two vibes just crash into each other.

It doesn't have to happen, but you might hit a point where you wonder why you stayed so isolated back then—like you missed out on some huge opportunity that feels way harder to grab now. Honestly, the worst part is that regret over "missed" moments, because most of the time, you didn't actually miss anything. You just weren't in a headspace to handle it at the time. Even so, that feeling of longing can still weigh you down heavy.

Given where you're at right now, don't force it. I totally get that feeling of wanting zero human contact. Just don't shut the door on socializing entirely. I doubt you've closed it for good, otherwise you wouldn't be asking how to find the motivation to get back out there.

So, no pressure, but maybe start mentally mapping out what kind of crew would actually fit your vibe. Think about finding one or two people who don't make hanging out feel like a chore or an escape mission. Maybe there are some folks from your college classes you haven't really talked to yet. You never know... For now, just take care of yourself without the guilt, and slowly set the stage so that when you're ready, you can step back into a social circle that actually feels comfortable.

Maybe use the idea of "future you" as motivation—the version of you that won't feel this way forever. One day, something might just click, and you'll suddenly feel a nudge to reach out. Nothing crazy, just a little spark. It's like how a dad might not get his kid because they're so different; maybe you can't fully wrap your head around who you'll be in the future either, since you won't be exactly the same person you are today.

Anyway, I'm just trying to tackle the question you asked in the intro. I've used a lot of "maybe" because I don't know your whole story—only you do. Regardless, wishing you nothing but the best! 🙂

Right now, you’re dropping warnings on a thread about nonprofits just because it looks like off-topic (even if I'm technically part of that).

But when it comes to the actual discussion I'm having—which isn't even off-topic—you just wipe it out instantly without so much as a heads-up?

Maybe take a second to check yourself and admit you messed up here? 😁

I'm thinking back to that whole debate we had. A buddy and I were going deep on that recent statement where Pope Francis compares Catholic and Islamic radicalism.

Man, that wasn't even off-topic.

Are you even sure you read what you just deleted?

northernsailor8 said:Look, there's a massive difference between picking on someone's opinion and actually debating the topic itself.

And where do you draw the line? Explain that to me.🤣

Have you even been following this thread? There are tons of comments here explaining why people think the Pope is right or wrong. They haven't been deleted, and honestly, they shouldn't be, because the whole point is his stance.

I remember back when we were talking about the Laudato encyclical—I was part of that discussion myself. Obviously, people were weighing in on things like global warming, but anyone involved was really just answering the core question: is the Pope right or wrong in his encyclical? And naturally, those comments weren't wiped out!

Plus, my buddy and I kept bringing up specific quotes from him or noting when he left something out. For instance, my friend argued the Pope always links economics to terrorism, so I backed him up by citing a statement made to the US Congress. Then he said the Pope ignores the religious side of terrorism, so I countered by pointing to Francis's comments on blasphemy when people invoke God during an attack.

northernsailor8, you missed the mark here. Fix your mistake.

Just scrolling through the "Pope Francis" thread. Most of it is just people obsessing over the Pope's stances on this or that. Honestly, it's weird how the mods haven't nuked like 95% of these posts yet. Don't you think?

northernsailor8 said:Look, guys, if you don't get why the talk about Islamic terrorism got nuked from the thread about the Pope, you clearly haven't figured out how politics as a subforum works yet.

Blunt off-topic stuff like that usually gets wiped.

Off-topic?

But the Pope—who the whole thread is actually about—is talking about Islamist theory. Every single comment from me and my buddy here was just referencing things the Pope actually said.

How is that off-topic, for God's sake?

The thread isn't even titled something like "Christian Mercy" or "Same-Sex Marriage." So, is it also against the rules to comment on the Pope's take on mercy or marriage?

Wait, seriously???

A few days ago, in the "Pope Francis" thread, a discussion between me and another user got wiped. We were just having a civil back-and-forth about the Pope's statements and views—no insults, no off-topic nonsense, nothing. So, why was it deleted?

slybison8 said:Like, third place? Israel is a heavy hitter, a totally established nation and a massive global player. Hamas isn't even in the same league. You guys are getting pretty old with these demands—if we're calling them Hamas, then fine, call Israel whatever you want.

It doesn't work that way.

If Hamas actually wants to take on Israel—whether they're trying to fight them physically or outmaneuver them politically—then maybe they can ask for the same level of respect given to actual sovereign states.

This forum is supposed to be a space for free thinkers to hash things out— not a playground for political propagandists looking for a fight.

...

Thanks for reading.

PL

Give me a break!👍

Honestly, I think I deserve a little credit for sitting through this entire "annual festival of hypocrisy" from start to finish.

rowdytiger13 said:How much longer?
I honestly think most people don't feel the need to throw around labels like fascist, Nazi, genocidal, or terrorist just to make a point.
I’m totally fine writing "Hamas" or "Hamas members" without adding "terrorist" in front of it, and I'm ready to hash that out with the other moderators if needed.
Whether that flies or not isn't entirely up to me anyway.

Here’s (yet) another example of how far this goes.

The rule states:

Glorifying or promoting Nazism or fascism, racist ideologies, or any ideology containing racist and xenophobic elements, as well as displaying symbols of such ideologies.

Look, you don't have to explicitly praise those things to promote them. Someone looking for it could easily find indirect examples all over this forum.

By banning specific labels used against certain politicians or groups, it implies those labels are actually worse than indirectly pushing fascism.

But they aren't.

It's just way EASIER to punish someone for using an epithet because they're blunt and short (like saying "terrorist" or "criminal"), making them easy targets for the rules.

Meanwhile, the stuff mentioned earlier—like subtly promoting aspects of fascism—is harder to pin down with a rule and sometimes even harder to spot, so it stays untouched.

Punishing "epithets" while letting the other stuff slide is just glaringly obvious.

Stop going after the "labels" and things won't look so messy.

rowdytiger13 said:Regarding the suggestion that we shouldn't be allowed to call Hamas a terrorist organization either... I'm down to chat about that proposal with the politics mods.

😁😁😁

Dude, just stop. PLEASE.

You know exactly where this rabbit hole leads.

rowdytiger13 said:I can't find any posts from you yet. Give me a specific one to work on! RIOBOSS I’m calling him a liar.
Look, that's just not how it works. My warning was kept totally general—just like any other heads-up I'd give—and I didn't name a single person on this forum in it.

😁

Mine. Decision made. It stays because under US law, defamation is a criminal offense. That goes for everyone—even politicians. te Anyone can sue for defamation if they want to.

What decision? Decision about what, and about whom? Was it a decision on what you're having for lunch today? And why use "that" if you're speaking in general terms? Also, who even posted right before you? implicitLike I said, you basically just called him a liar.

I gave you a perfect example of where this kind of moderation policy can go wrong, but I guess you missed the point, didn't you?

You just opened Pandora's box.

rowdytiger13 said:I’m sticking to my guns on this one. I'm not about to let anyone label someone a war criminal when there aren't even any charges filed. It just doesn't fly with me.
The ball's in the admins' court now.

It’s just like that explanation from William Bennett53—or whatever other way someone tries to justify the moderation rules. It all boils down to this.

While this stuff on page 139 of the Israel-Palestine thread is going in a totally different direction:

I'm sticking to my guns on this one. Under the Law of the USA, libel is a real crime, and anyone—even a politician—can sue you for it if you're spreading lies.Just because you're posting under a username doesn't give you a free pass to smear public figures.Calling someone a war criminal is a massive accusation. If it’s fake, it’s straight-up libel. As it stands, there isn't even a legal proceeding against Benjamin Netanyahu, let alone a conviction. Until a trial actually happens, those labels don't mean a thing. If anyone has an issue with how people are talking, they should just take it to the FBI.

Slander is a crime under the Law of the USA.

Just like a war crime, it's still a felony—just a much heavier one.

By your logic, Joshua Diaz18 can't call Benjamin Netanyahu a war criminal. Since there’s no actual court case or legal conviction against the Israeli PM, he hasn't been officially labeled one.

And that's why it's just cardboard.

By that same logic, you don't have any right to call out Joshua Diaz18. implicitCalling someone a slanderer with a bolded sentence is totally out of line. You can't just label someone a criminal when there hasn't been a trial or a legal conviction against Joshua Diaz18.

And you aren't a total bot either.

Based on what, exactly? And what kind of logic are we even using here?

Shouldn't you be facing some consequences too? Since you're out here doing exactly what Joshua Diaz18 did with Benjamin Netanyahu—basically acting like a judge and jury by claiming a crime was committed before anyone else.

Does anyone know if there's a rule somewhere in the forum guidelines about when you can or can't prejudicirati someone's guilt during a debate?