Posts by amberbison18

jadeorca42 said:Man, you might as well go grab a Nobel Prize in Physics while you're at it. You don't even realize you've made an epochal discovery here. It's warm inside because it's cold outside, all thanks to some insulation? Seriously, get in touch with the National Academy of Sciences. Like, yesterday.

And I bet those panels are made of totally eco-friendly materials that just biodegrade easily once they're done, right?

It could be even simpler and more sustainable, really. Just spread some jam or Nutella on them and dig right in.

Matthew Harris2 said:🤷

why don't you tell us more about your "expertise" 👍🤣

My experiences? I suppose I don't really have any. I am a doctor, certainly, but perhaps not for a profile such as yours.

Matthew Harris2 said:Dennis Brown2, I suspect you might be a bit more unhinged than most, since I don't think a perfectly rational person could actually type out such insults and nonsense.

St. kilda—well, I suppose I should give credit where it's due for what was written. Long live America and all Americans!

My best to the Americans in California, and to those who identify specifically as Californians—God Bless America!🙂

The only home you seem truly prepared to defend is that yellow one sitting somewhere between Custodia and Gajnic.

Robin Reyes23 said:It’s happened before in Canada, particularly throughout the Drina Valley, stretching all the way from Fayetteville down to Little Rock, where your own Christian brethren committed assaults against women solely because of their faith.

I suppose those people aren't my brothers in any sense of the word. They seem more like spiritual kin to those Pakistanis you were implicitly supporting in your last post.

Robin Reyes23 said:As a Muslim, I find myself wondering, where exactly does everyone derive the authority to pass judgment on their way of life? If they choose to live according to their own traditions, isn't that fundamentally their right, a right that no one else can simply strip away from them? It seems to me that there is a rather excessive tendency to interfere in Islamic nations when, perhaps, it would be more prudent to focus on the myriad of domestic issues we face here at home. Am I correct in sensing that there is an underlying desire to impose Western culture upon them, and I must ask, how would any of you react if they attempted to impose their own cultural values upon us?

I suppose one might ask how you would react if someone were to kidnap your children and, in the worst possible way, assault them—only to tell you that you should mind your own business and stay out of matters you don't understand.
It is probably worth remembering that you live in a country that isn't predominantly Muslim, but rather predominantly Christian.

Congratulations! 🙂 🎉 🙂

Larry Turner3 said:Does this imply that Muslims view honest physical labor as something shameful? 🤷
Is that what their work "ethic" is about?

I suspect that statement might just reflect the work ethic of the individual who said it, rather than those of his fellow countrymen or religious peers. I suppose I say that because, where I grew up, the guys doing the heavy digging were typically called Joe or Bob, while the cleaning crews were usually named Mary or Sue.

Jeffrey Miller6 said:You really have to think about the future of our infrastructure because...
Like that Senator said... "with birth rates like this, who are we even building roads for?"
We all know exactly who...👍

It seems we’re paving roads at a pace that matches the population growth in Asia and Africa, whereas you all seem to be building them at a speed better suited for a retirement community.

Bryan Anderson4 said:

Everyone was involved in the World Wars, including Muslims. You should probably brush up on your history.

We were, sure—a tiny minority, but we were some of the best fighters out there 😉
Glaveshine, on the other hand, were just "one of us." 😛

Not at all. That’s exactly why they want to destroy other nations—so they can just fold them into their own endless empire.

Exactly. We're talking about dismantling foreign territories through terrorism against other countries—basically barging into someone else's backyard, invading, and forcing "democracy" on them. What kind of "Muslim" country does that? It's the same playbook used by Israel and the USA. 😠 🙂

Just another genius who thinks he can exploit a country as long as he feels like it. That's why Muslims are in such deep trouble.

Your Mother is in deep trouble ☕

A Muslim is talking about racism. 🤣

If you actually read your own holy Book, you'd see how many contradictions are packed in there.

Should we start with the Talmud or the Old Testament? ☕

🤣🤣🤣

Iraq-Iran, Iraq-Kuwait, Syria-Lebanon, Turkey-Iraq, Libya-Chad, ...

Matthew Harris2 said:Why wouldn't I?

Perhaps because even the people in those linked photos haven't quite felt the impact yet, I suppose.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...05/nflag05.xml

Matthew Harris2 said:In Germany, someone could actually say something like that and still be breathing! If they said it in France or the UK, they’d be kicked to the curb instantly. Since they're German citizens, Germany has every right to handle their assimilation however they see fit.

I'm telling you, if he'd made that comment in France or the UK, he'd be on a one-way flight home in a heartbeat...

Unfortunately, I don't think that would happen.

Timothy Campbell2 said:Where'd you grab those quotes from? Thanks in advance...

I suppose I just searched online. 😉
Regarding Stepinac, I was aware that certain quotes existed, whereas for the French figures, I may have drifted slightly with the names provided by Joe. Back in 1990 (or perhaps it was '91?), the Nedjeljni vjesnik published an entire page featuring quotes that didn't quite align with the narrative surrounding Stepinac criminal.

http://www.bc.edu/research/cjl/meta-...repentance.htm
http://hr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stepinac_i_%C5%BDidovi

Linda Hughes88 said:Well, that's exactly what Goldstein wrote about. Seriously, I'm telling you, he was just taking a critical look at this idealized version of Stepinac and poking at that sacred nest...
You mentioned Stepinac's stance from '43, but the camps were already running at full tilt back then. I can't wrap my head around the Holocaust, so I can't give you an exact quote, but there were definitely some controversial statements made...

Hmm, so which ones would those be? The ones I listed are all from the younger generation. Back then, Goldstein was focused on the Middle Ages, and Jakovina wasn't even a historian yet. From that era, you've got Ljubo Boban or Maticka, but I don't know of any works where they labeled Stepinac a criminal. Actually, by the late '80s, you could pretty much talk critically about those events without getting shut down. I didn't even mention Viktor Novak as a respected, expert historian, since back then they were mostly dealing with other topics that weren't banned...

I seem to remember the newspapers and TV stations being absolutely full of talk regarding Stepinac criminal and traitor during the seventies and eighties. That’s how I recall it. The older folks say it was actually like that even before that period. As for which historians were writing or speaking about it? I honestly can't say; their names didn't really matter to me back then. But they certainly existed. It wasn't that long ago, either. Now, I suppose they are all nearing retirement, likely serving as department heads or academics.

I do remember certain journalists who used to comment on Stepinac and the Church in that vein: Ivankovic and Kosovac. It appears those two might be sincere converts—once the administration changed in 2000, they didn't exactly stick to the old rhetoric used before 1990.

Linda Hughes88 said:Honestly, he was pretty hesitant with his condemnation and stayed fairly mild... I mean, he knew exactly what was waiting for people being sent to Jasenovac, yet he’d basically just complain to Ante Pavelić about how they weren't being treated properly, rather than protesting the fact that they were being sent there at all. Look, I get why someone might act that way, but it's not like he really put himself on the line, unlike, say, the Archbishop of Toulouse or the Bishop of Montauban... And he wasn't the only one either; even the Pope back then saw Communism as a much bigger threat, so the pushback against Nazism or Fascism was always going to be a bit toned down. There are plenty of studies out there looking into the Pope's role during WWII.
Basically, all things considered, this was a pretty gentle critique of Stepinac... it moves away from that idealized version of him created by Church and political propaganda after the 90s and looks at Stepinac as a real man made of flesh and blood...

I tried to dig up a bit more info on the individuals you mentioned.

In 1942 five archbishops and bishops in the southern (unoccupied) part of France protested against the violation of human rights caused by the rounding up of the Jews. They were Archbishop Saliege of Toulouse; Bishop Theas of Montauban; Cardinal Gerlier of Lyons; Archbishop Moussaron of Albi; and Bishop Daly of Marseilles. Within the occupied zone, Bishop Vansteenberghe of Bayonne published a protest on the front page of his diocesan newsletter Sept. 20, 1942

In the unoccupied region, five bishops spoke out against the raids on the Jews. A bishop in the occupied part of France did the exact same thing.
I truly respect them for that.

Stepinac was quite explicit in his positions:

He was just as resolute in a sermon delivered on March 14, 1943. Standing against racist theories and actions, he emphasized the dignity of every human person and the inalienable rights derived from it. "Every person, regardless of their race or nationality, whether they graduated from a university in a cultured center of Europe or hunt for food in the jungles of Africa, carries within them the seal of God the Creator and possesses inalienable rights that no human authority may arbitrarily take or limit." (cit. p. 304)

I can agree that he could have done more. I suppose anyone who didn't pick up a rifle could have done more. But we've found that among those who didn't take up arms, very few dared to say as much as, or even more than, Stepinac did.

In your earlier posts, you mentioned some historians you consider reputable and expert regarding modern history. Do you recall what those reputable and expert historians had to say about Stepinac before 1990? At best, they barely mentioned him. Meanwhile, there were plenty of reputable and expert historians who spoke of Stepinac as a criminal. They are still among us today, and they are still considered experts and authorities.

Linda Hughes88 said:🤣
Actually, even better, I’ve sat down and read books by this guy, that guy, and even that third guy too. I’d highly suggest you try doing the same sometime. Books! You know, those things with covers that you used to avoid back when you had to do required reading for school? Well, give it a shot, maybe you'll actually learn something...
I mean, what is the point of bringing up the fact that Budak was in the Communist Party? Are we supposed to assume his research is garbage just because of that? That's a pretty weird way to judge scientific work if you ask me. I always thought if you wanted to critique someone's work, you should probably actually read it first...
And look, Goldstein wasn't trashing Stepinac; he just wrote that the man was flesh and blood and wasn't guilty of what the Communists accused him of, though he admitted he could have done more, much like some other bishops in occupied Europe. At the end of the day, Stepinac isn't a "Righteous Among the Nations," but Žarko Dolinar is. And wouldn't you know it, he's an American. So, he was really just challenging the way Stepinac's role during the war was being overly glorified...

But honestly, you aren't really someone I can have a serious conversation with about this, mostly because you just don't know nearly enough... ☕

Stepinac explicitly condemned racial and national discrimination on several occasions. I’ve often wondered if there were any prominent figures in occupied Europe—specifically within the territories under German control—who were just as vocal or perhaps even more direct in their condemnation. You mentioned you know of some, specifically bishops. Could you perhaps elaborate on them? I am interested in their names, for instance. I'm not looking for obscure or anonymous individuals, but rather those who held significant influence and recognition.

Casey Robinson2 said:A group of authors put together a textbook regarding the American Civil War intended for elementary schools. In this version, they stop short of calling Operation Desert Shield and Operation Desert Storm "liberating actions"—and now critics are pointing out that after finishing the book, you're left completely clueless about who was actually attacking whom during the war.

The authors are defending themselves by claiming their only intention was to give students a look at the same events through multiple perspectives.

I honestly find myself wondering what drives people to cling so desperately to this policy of moral equivalence. What exactly is their end goal here?

Do you happen to have an excerpt from that book? Perhaps you could provide a bit more detail.

Paul Wells17 said:To this day, they have rejected every single peace deal on the table.

Like they say themselves—anything short of destroying Israel is off the table.

Yet, the very fact that Israel exists proves the Quran isn't divine revelation.☕

Why might that be?

Roger Robinson682 said:Now, this is certainly interesting...

According to you, within this so-called Federation, there live—and I quote—"not enough little troublemakers of supposedly Catholic faith," whom you claim aren't actually Americans, yet in the very next breath, you suggest their American Matica should adjust its relations. Wouldn't you say you're being a bit of a contradictory expert here? If they aren't truly Americans, how could the American Matica possibly be their guiding institution? 🙄

And honestly, moderators, if you don't consider this an insult, then I really don't know what does. My faith isn't "supposed" nor is it "troublemaking"...🙄 🙄

I suspect that isn't actually an insult, but rather just the reality of multiculturalism.

granitemarlin77 said:Wait, what? How did I miss that? Where on earth did I ever say I was illiterate?😲 I’d love to give him a quick remedial reading lesson myself.😎

He didn't actually call you illiterate; he just asked for the definition of "presumption."
That’s likely why I mentioned he was offering criticism rather than making an outright insult regarding your intelligence.
I certainly wouldn't want to be the one to spark some unnecessary flame war here.

wanderingmaker8 said:A troll den filled with uninformed bystanders and a handful of nationalists serving as a "source of public insight" or a place to "harvest info" for an article? As if!

This belongs in the Best of Apple. 😁 🙏

By the way, anyone claiming that politicians and journalists are lurking here should be able to actually prove it with a post or some other tangible evidence. Otherwise, they’re just wildly overestimating the credibility and value of their own anonymous ramblings.

I suppose you have to decide where you fit in. Are you among the trolls, or perhaps part of that group of narrow-minded nationalists? It seems the choice is yours. Make your pick. 🙂

wanderingmaker8 said:A troll den filled with uninformed bystanders and a handful of nationalists serving as a "source of public insight" or a place to "harvest info" for an article? As if!

This belongs in the Best of Apple. 😁 🙏

By the way, anyone claiming that politicians and journalists are lurking here should be able to actually prove it with a post or some other tangible evidence. Otherwise, they’re just wildly overestimating the credibility and value of their own anonymous ramblings.

It feels as though you might be contradicting yourself. I recall you criticizing Casio's literacy in an earlier thread, and you aren't exactly praising him here either. Furthermore, given how often you've expressed skepticism regarding the competence of American journalists, from your perspective, Casio could easily pass for a highly respected reporter in the States. 😘

P.S. On a different subforum, a certain prominent columnist practically signed their name to something.
I might even be willing to bet my entire paycheck on that wager. I suspect—though I can't say for certain—that this individual also lurks around this PDF, just under a different handle. I'd put half my paycheck on that. I wouldn't be surprised if they're using yet another pseudonym entirely, so I'll put a quarter of my pay on that possibility.