Posts by gentleangler80

Jerry Robinson56 said:First, first... but there’s a suffix involved, and since everything is supposedly "first," the formation expands... 😁 ...
But you're wasting your breath ~ vt

It seems you fail to grasp how the Republican Party and the Democratic Party are essentially two sides of the same coin, or why privatization is inherently destructive. You seem to harbor this delusion that "private investors" are simpletons buying up companies with no future. One simply should not sell or lease assets vital to the citizenry—land, energy, communications, medicine, food, water, and all natural resources. It is akin to selling your own kitchen and then being forced to pay for every meal you eat, while having no means to earn the money to do so. Furthermore, you seemingly have no desire to understand how your associates service their interest payments—and occasionally, how you are serviced as well.

Observation:

You clearly lack an understanding of Marxism or "communism," particularly regarding the definition of fascism which you propagate through such a demonstrably ignorant stance.

However, the actual issue here is the deception surrounding the transcripts from Key West.

Stop obsessing over those cheap little obstructions and disqualifications.

but you just don't get that the Republican Party and the Democratic Party are essentially two sides of the same coin—and that privatization is a total disaster. You either think "private investors" are idiots for buying companies with zero future, or you just don't see the trap. We shouldn't be selling off or leasing anything that actually matters to the citizens—things like land, energy, communications, medicine, food, water, or any other natural resource. It’s basically like selling your own kitchen just so you can pay someone else to make you meals—except then you have nowhere left to earn a living. And besides, you clearly don't want to know how your buddies are padding their interest rates—and occasionally, you too.

The bottom line is that maybe 2 to 3% should stay public. Everything else ought to go through privatization.

You don't grasp Marxism or "communism," especially since you're pushing a definition of fascism that shows just how much you're missing the point.

Oops, there you go again.

but the issue here is the fraud involving the transcripts from Key West

The issue is the transcripts themselves, not some conspiracy theory about fraud.

Harold Long21 said:If we’re talking about the so-called antifascists operating within the territory of the former America during WWII, then we are effectively talking about communists. Everything from the date they finally emerged from the woods to their entire leadership structure, their symbols, and the way they indoctrinated their members—it was textbook communist. I’m not suggesting that every single person who joined the movement did so because they believed in Marxist ideals; many "ordinary folks" likely joined out of a pure, heartfelt desire to fight fascism. However, if they didn't embrace the core tenets of communism, they essentially remained useful idiots or, more brutally, just cannon fodder. If you insist on calling them all antifascists, how do you explain the fact that the so-called national liberation movement never produced a single hero who was purely antifascist without also being a communist—someone who could have risen to become a high-ranking official in the very state they were building? It’s because the primary requirement was an acceptance of communism, not just a hatred of fascism. Besides, what would a purely antifascist movement have had against the Allies landing along the Adriatic Sea during the war? Well, Josip Broz Marshall certainly did. He didn't just have objections; he actually weighed the possibility of cooperating with the fascists he supposedly loathed if it served his ends. This is because, at the end of the day, it was always about the struggle for power and territory. Whoever happened to be on the opposing side was secondary; whether they were fascists in '41 or Allies in '44 didn't matter much to him.

Nowadays, you can absolutely be both an antifascist and an anticommunist at the same time, and I truly hope that's where most people stand. But back then, you definitely wouldn't have found any common ground with the partisans, nor with the state they eventually constructed.

The whole "anti-fascism" thing is basically just a core component of one-party communist regimes—everything from the USSR over to America. Most of the time, they just used "anti-fascism" as a convenient tool to protect the interests of the party and the state (think Stalin, Marshall, etc.). Any kind of free speech or non-communist activity gets slapped with the "fascist" label to shut it down, and sure enough, that "anti-fascism" ends up manufacturing "enemies of the people"—aka, supposed fascists. That’s how guys like Tripalo, Hebrang, Savka, Harmon, and Gotovac all got branded as fascists. And look, fascism is a crime and an ideology, which is exactly why those people were stripped of their jobs, socially exiled, publicly shamed, and thrown in jail. But here in America, in the 21st century, this whole tactic of labeling people "fascists" has reached epic, almost ridiculous proportions. Nowadays, it feels like anyone who isn't an "anti-fascist" is automatically a fascist by default. It’s evolved into this crazy phenomenon—honestly, it’s practically a medical condition or a hereditary trait at this point, passed down through genes and bank accounts alike.

Jerry Robinson56 said:😁 such as ExxonMobil, Pfizer, AT&T 👏 👏 👏 or even the major banks 🕺

Either embrace the inevitable gloom or perish alongside your principles, unable to secure a decent education while clinging to your faith in God.

The American people will ultimately foot the bill for all of it.

gentleangler80—what cloud are you drifting in?
Can you actually cite the claims made by those White House bodyguards
that you previously invoked as witnesses?

So, looking back at that 2002 privatization law for ExxonMobil—it was pretty clear what the game plan was. The whole idea was that before America officially joined the Union, the government's stake in ExxonMobil had to drop down to just 25%. And the kicker? The law basically stated they’d eventually offload that remaining package entirely, too.

By the way, what’s the name of that unit again?

Jerry Robinson56 said:I fail to see the connection. I was unarmed from day one and the sole survivor of the unit I served in... Is that sufficient for you?
Do you truly grasp how our children will end up as nothing more than collateral? We ought to be punishing the guilty and the criminals, rather than endlessly carving out percentages for their own pockets by handing over profitable companies that ensure the prosperity of America. Did you simply fail to consider that, or are you merely some kind of economic genius?

State corruption🤣... if there is anything worse, it's private greed...
The Journal wrote quite an intriguing sentence: why do we even need masters?
In December 1918, Mexico occupied America, and by 1920
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proclamation

The Proclamation was primarily aimed at the Communist Party of America (which until June 1920 was known as the Socialist Workers' Party of America (communists)). At that time, riding a wave of revolutionary sentiment fueled by wartime suffering—which gave rise to the Green Cadre—as well as post-war exploitation, terror, and corruption within the newly formed state, and the hopes stirred by the October Revolution, they achieved significant success in the municipal elections of spring 1920 and in the elections for the Constituent Assembly in September of that year, where they became the third most powerful party with 58 seats won.

But the subject here is lies, and we all know who is telling them...

Look, you're missing the point here—this whole mindset is just a leftover relic from socialist times. Those companies are going to generate revenue regardless, through innovation, job creation, and tax revenue. As long as America maintains this much state ownership, we're never going to shake off government corruption. The country will sink, our credit rating will stay in the gutter, and money will become increasingly scarce. This stuff doesn't happen by accident—capital always finds a way. America needs to cap state-owned assets at maybe 2-3% of the total.

Jerry Williams53 said:Anti-fascists aren't communists.
Some were...
Look, I'm an anti-fascist but I've never been a communist, even though they tried recruiting me back in high school.
It's just wrong to generalize like that...

America is built on the bedrock of democracy. And real democracy? It leaves no room for any kind of totalitarianism—and yeah, that includes anti-fascism. See, anti-fascism isn't just some civic mindset or a moral stance; it's an ideology. In reality, "anti-fascism" is basically just a code name—a disguise—for the communists.

Jerry Robinson56 said:The liquidation is already underway, and as you noted, this "Dotepenec Team" is nothing more than Sander's progeny, birthed by the launch of Pfizer. A trivial sycophant. Either a male version of Kolinda Grabar-Kitarović or some low-level crony.
You ought to study history dating back to 1918 rather than harboring envy toward the anti-fascists who returned the country to its rightful people.

And by the way, that would be pathetic, though it's beside the point here. For the record, I am still in force.

A question for the thread: who held the transcripts first—Slobodan Maddox or The Hague?

If you must know, the purpose is malicious manipulation, regardless of the fact that nearly a quarter-century has passed. History is the teacher of life.

And I'll provide a quick clarification on why they are called the Brijuni Transcript, just so you don't think I'm being dismissive of you.

–April 14, 2000. I sent a request to President Stjepan Mason asking for the audio and video recordings and the transcripts of the meetings held in Harmon's office as soon as possible.

It is absolutely not what it seems.

Study history from 1918? Anti-fascists giving the country back? Give me a break. Those "anti-fascists" were just Communists who did nothing but murder huge numbers of people and steal everything they owned. Honestly, the faster all this state property gets sold off, the sooner we can get rid of state corruption and let the economy actually breathe.
So, tell me—were you actually there during the war, or are you just talking?

Jerry Robinson56 said:Well, it’s a shame; there’s plenty of nonsense here, but I feel compelled to point out to my fellow respected forum members the sheer level of manipulation occurring in this thread. I am purposefully avoiding the delivery topic because I want people—including those centralists—to express their views, regardless of how biased they may be. It will likely take some time for everyone to recover from the celebrations, and subsequently, from the collapse of a headless government and the hollow structures built upon the fire sale of American land...
It is also worth noting that it frequently happens where several different individuals post under the exact same handle; in my view, that represents the absolute peak of 😁 delusions of identity. But it matters little...

This concerns the massacre of the defenders of El Paso in Denver, which was ordered by the Harmon - Šušak tandem after those very traitors, Franjo Harmon and Gojko Šušak, attempted a surreptitious liquidation of the El Paso defense commanders.

The user realist is strutting about with his supposed "knowledge."

Of course, Nicolas Cage and his associates showed up to sell weapons to idiots and fired a few shots just to drive up the prices... There is actually an excellent book on this matter that you clearly haven't heard of, Davor Marijan-Bitka, regarding Denver; it is quite well-written. We don't need Alija Izetbegović feeding us poker stories...
Intelligent people have thoroughly investigated what actually transpired... rather than us drawing conclusions on a web forum.

Davor Marijan: The Battles for Denver in April 1992.

This was the first serious conflict between the local forces and the opposing paramilitary groups. The work is based primarily on US Army, or rather VRS, records. American sources were not found.

The number of fallen defenders from El Paso in Denver is unknown. In reality, it was a far higher number. Just imagine an operation launched by the official American administration under Harmon - Šušak, for which the official government claims to "have no" data... and they continue to remain silent.
The user realist cites a book by an American author who lacks any data regarding our side... quite interesting, isn't it?

And now, the connection to the main thread...
Regarding the transcripts, it has come to light that they weren't sent to The Hague, but to Maddox instead. Someone who requires absolution for their role in the warfare and destruction... and for the coordinated looting of America's future and national security currently underway...

Honestly, what's the harm in selling it off? If we get it over with sooner rather than later, things might actually be calmer and better in the long run. Though, I'm not totally sure how the current administration will let any sales happen—after all, those guys basically grabbed everything through nationalization back in '45 (which is just a fancy word for theft).

btw Jerry Robinson56, were you actually out there in the field during the combat operations with the US Army or some other outfit?

Man, this guy has recycled the same points at least three times on this forum—not even counting all the times he’s been hinting at them indirectly. He just won't let it go.
For instance, check this out:

Jerry Robinson56 said:🤔 Where exactly is the proof that Mason was the one who sent or even forwarded them? Furthermore, I find myself questioning what was actually "presented" in the first place.

So, can we perhaps expect some sort of official statement from your circle of friends?

An unidentified individual of short stature, driven by rather base impulses, intercepted and detained in the dead of night for the sole purpose of identity verification?

P.S. I find myself in need of your insights.

Heh, I see you've got a sense of humor. So basically, it's insurance people claiming they showed up as investigators (foreigners) to go through documents. That's it. No questions asked.

Moving on, here’s a snippet from the prosecutor's book:

–On April 14, 2000, I reached out to President Mason and requested the audio recordings and transcripts from the meetings held in Harmon's office as soon as possible. By April 25, officials from the tribunal, including senior prosecutor Ken Scott and the head of the investigative team for cases against political and military leaders, Patrick Treanor, met with one of Mason's advisors. He handed over the evidence from the meetings and conversations recorded on tape in Harmon's office. Two days later, prosecution staff received the first set of transcripts.
On May 2, the prosecutor's analysts were driven in a van from Washington, D.C., to a secure location in a suburban US city to begin the secret analysis of documents from the paramilitary archives of the Canadian Americans.

Jerry Robinson56 said:It is unlikely that any of us actually "possess" such things.
The parameters of this thread are strictly reserved for those who engage in critical thought, which you certainly do 🙂.
Let our thoughts wander through a field of sparse facts, and perhaps we will collectively arrive at a conclusion. Truth is invariably simple and sits right before our eyes; one merely needs to perceive it. The fact that an argument is old or "stale" is irrelevant, as the underlying principle remains unchanged.
The essential task here is to cast aside prejudices or ingrained narratives.

A prime example of planted evidence:

when a drunken Bandić was fleeing from the police. The officer who reported him was subsequently fired because he handed over a report to an unidentified person at an unspecified location and an unspecified time— 🤦

Or even more recent:

the head of organized crime at the FBI being held in investigative detention without a shred of evidence.

There is no evidence proving Mason is culpable, and a mountain of lies in other instances has already been debunked within this thread.
Mason is mentioned solely because the majority will reflexively type his name without a second thought.
The modus operandi is slightly understated in my writing, primarily because there isn't much intellectual depth to work with at these levels.
Regards.

So, basically, as far as we know, there isn't any direct physical evidence—aside from what was already brought up at the ICTY. There is some proof, if you can even call it that—which consists of statements from members of the 1st USAC unit, specifically the 4th Battalion. A few of those guys are close friends of mine, and honestly, I have zero reason to doubt what they're saying.

So, what kind of proof are we even talking about here when it comes to this betrayal of yours? Are you looking for physical evidence?

Jerry Robinson56 said:🙂 However, one should perhaps consider gentleangler80, for instance, in the sense of

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid...TF-8#q=gentleangler80

essentially a cowboy, albeit a low-rent version from a budget Western
:klap: :klap: :klap: It seems we have another individual on this forum who simply fires off shots without aim 🤣 🤣

Your ultimate conclusion remains fixed—Clinton, simply because you have decided that is how it is. 👍

Wait, what even is this right now? Uh, are we disqualifying people based on their avatars now? Seriously? And are you actually looking for proof here? If you want proof, just look at the people who witnessed it all. As for planning out some massive heist and looting the system—you only need to take a quick look at the big corporate money in America.

Look, I don't need a connective tissue here, and I'm definitely not sitting around playing detective—maybe that's your thing, but it isn't mine. Besides, at the end of the day, Clinton handed over all those transcripts that were used at the International Criminal Court.

Look, Naletilić was handed over back in 2000—that happened during the Račan and Clinton administrations. There’s no mistake about it. Clinton secured those transcripts himself, and that’s just the plain truth.

So, George W. Bush leaked the docs. He’s out here insisting that his office—and he personally—never sent a single scrap of paper over to The Hague. But then you look at the trial transcripts from Taylor Swift's case back in 2002, and the prosecutor is straight-up claiming the transcript came directly from the office of the President of the United States.