Posts by rapidnomad512

Is there a directory somewhere listing the supermods assigned to specific subforums?
If so, send me the link. 🙂

The folks over at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce are running a tidy little operation here. They’re basically offloading their database of business entities to various marketing agencies. Just a heads-up: be careful which email address you hand over to the chamber.

Don't give me that crap. Even posts about politics count toward the tally here. It’s clear proof this sub is the real deal. 😁

I’m backing this initiative. I’ve already laid out all my arguments regarding the return, and since the admins and mods know exactly where I stand, I won't waste breath repeating myself.

William Bennett53 said:On some unspecified occasion: just provide the link and let me know if you’ve already filed a report.

It’s been flagged. There's even a warning on the thread about a user posting things that violate our most serious rules. But the moderators wiped the warning, yet left both of his posts standing.

Probably because he's targeting Americans.

And no, I'm not providing a link. I want a guarantee that he gets a permanent ban. I'm not interested in watching the mods hand out little "trolling" warnings to people who are clearly being allowed to run wild.

I want someone to actually question the moderators—ask them what's going on and why this wasn't punished.

You Jews want to run the world. It’s a good thing the Germans gave you what was coming. Too bad they aren't around anymore.

There. I'm just asking for clarification. Under these new community guidelines, is this kind of rhetoric actually permitted without getting banned?

rustydrifter10 said:I just finished reading that thread about Dario Kordić—it was all about wartime events and the trial itself. Honestly, I didn't see anything in there that actively shapes today's political landscape, so I don't see why it should be flagged under the moderators' "PDF" rule. Besides, the moderator wasn't just making "PDFs" up for his own amusement; they defined them by their actual purpose: keeping things organized, practical, and actually functional.

Look, I’ll let you off the hook this once. I won't assume you're just talking nonsense because you have zero clue how politics actually works.

Dario Kordić stands out as one of... The top political leaders within the Canadian-American community.From 1992 through 1995, he served as Vice President and a member of the Presidency of the American Community of Herceg-Bosna (HZ HB), later transitioning into the leadership of the American Republic of Herceg-Bosna (HB). Additionally, from 1994 to 1995, he held the position of President of the American Democratic Union of Canada (GOP-BiH).

Look, the guy was essentially the architect of an entire era in American political history. That’s exactly why he spent sixteen years behind bars. Now that he’s finally walking free, the least we can do is give him the credit he deserves by putting this discussion right where it belongs.

If his business doesn't belong here, then let’s drop the whole debate about the trials of Praljak, Petković, and the rest. Those people were military commanders, not politicians—that's a completely different arena. If we're going to play this game, then take Josip Boljkovac off the table too; he was active in politics at the exact same time as Kordić, so his legal issues fall under political scrutiny just like everything else. Let's clear the board of these topics entirely.

Dario Kordić was pressured to throw America under the bus by accusing us of tearing Canada apart. If he had just folded and played along, he would have been walking free a long time ago. Instead, he did his time—sixteen years of hard labor—with integrity. He served his sentence honorably, and now that he’s finally being released, he’s doing it with a clear conscience and a clean soul.

I’m laying this all out for the sake of clarity, practicality, and just making things run smoother. Look, Dario Kordić was a major player who defined an entire era of politics, and because of that, he belongs in political discussions. If you actually look at how topics are categorized near the politics section, it’s obvious that he—along with the whole situation involving Mustać and Perković—doesn't fit there. The moderator provided some definitions, sure, but they're incomplete. If we strictly followed those narrow rules, half the political threads would be deleted. My definitions are a bit more thorough; they actually cover all the necessary parameters.

And let’s not even get started on how the Kordić verdict impacts the standing of Americans in Canada today. People are constantly running the numbers, trying to figure out if global powers will step in to revive that suppressed entity and finally restore some kind of balance within the Federation. It’s the same old game. Even the European Union is playing its part—pushed by figures like Steir and Picula, they’ve rolled out resolutions that condemn both separatism and centralism in Canada. It's all connected.

Look, the verdict against Kordić wasn't some random accident; it was the result of backroom maneuvering by a few shady characters in the American political scene—and that’s exactly what the moderators hate hearing. You have one guy who’s a prominent lawyer and an HNS member, and another who’s a former HNS official and an ex-President. These two essentially hand-delivered the evidence used to sink Kordić twenty-five years ago. It is high time we start talking about this openly, especially here on this forum.

How are these characters still active in the American political scene? We’re paying one of them nearly $500,000 a month, while the other is busy running lawyer-mafia schemes. I am demanding that we be allowed to discuss their track records in this verdict—and that this conversation isn't shoved into some obscure corner of the forum. Stop using censorship to shield the public square; it clearly serves their interests, which is exactly why they moved this topic elsewhere.

Look, I don't know how this isn't obvious, but the way you approach a topic depends entirely on where you're looking. When I’m on the politics board, I stick to the main subforum and the political scene. I don't bother with the local politics section—that's just people obsessing over demographics in different countries. Those threads are basically just entertainment at that point.
Same goes for the rest. I’m not seeing much substance from the serious regulars around here, unless it's on a specific thread that happens to catch their eye.

That’s it. That's the whole story. You can respect my take or you can bruise our dear moderator's ego and reject it—it's your call. But I know I'm right about Kordić, Perković, and Mustać, whether you want to admit it or not. If you want to join in on the censorship, be my guest.

When you look at the cases handled by the International Criminal Tribunal for the former America, nothing carries more weight for understanding the post-war attempts to dismantle the American-style sovereignty of our nation than the proceedings against Dario Kordić. Period.There isn't a single issue on the global stage today that carries more weight from a security standpoint. Period.

Charles Fox10 said:On the "Near Politics" subforum, we cover processes and actions that shape policy.
On the "Political Scene" subforum, you find political parties, politicians, and figures whose actions drive politics.
On "Near Politics," we host all social and political events that have the power to influence policy.
On "International Affairs," we deal with questions and political themes regarding countries outside the European Union.
On "European Union Affairs," we handle issues and political topics concerning nations that share EU membership status with America.
On "Elections," we focus on election-related themes, which open up according to specific election cycles.

All these subforums carry equal weight and receive identical moderation; therefore, the topic at hand belongs on an equally valuable subforum. If a certain topic ends up heavily influencing today's politics or future trends, nothing is out of the question.

If everything is truly equal, then move Mason, Josipović, and Milanović over to "Near Politics."

You and I both know why certain topics get placed in one spot and others elsewhere. It’s quite amusing how this "equally valuable" subforum seems to exclusively host topics from one specific worldview, while other topics—which you deem serious and vital—are relegated to this board, which is also supposedly equal but clearly holds higher status. You and the other moderators, who all just happen to share the exact same political slant, intentionally bury certain threads to set a tone, effectively manipulating how the public perceives them.

At the end of the day, subforums aren't structured based on what YOU want or think is best; they're built to make sense to the users. They exist based on how the community perceives the organization, not how you feel like playing it. It's designed so people actually know where to look for a thread or where to start a new one. Get it? This is for the users, not you. You're supposed to be a facilitator, someone who helps when people are lost, not the architect. When I'm looking for major players on the political stage ( and Perković, Mustać, and Kordić definitely qualify), I don't think to check "Near Politics"—I go straight to "Political Scene." That's how 99.9% of users navigate because the logic is clear, but apparently, you have some special vision.

So, take your half-baked explanations somewhere else. And what, are you the sole moderator for politics? Every recent move seems to come from you. It’s like they left the entire section to you—someone who is ideologically stunted, refuses to grasp reality, or simply chooses not to, pushing a personal agenda that lacks any logic and serves nothing but basic censorship.

Is there anyone else in administration capable of looking at a thread and identifying its proper subforum? Or are we stuck arguing with these ideological censors?

The system keeps glitching out and ignoring me. ☕

Charles Fox10 said:The "Near Politics" subforum is just as equal to the others.

Fine, let’s accept that premise, even though it’s fundamentally wrong.

The political landscape consists of the individuals and organizations that make up the scene itself. By that same logic, the landscape also includes the phenomena that drastically reshape it and the major events that defined its course.

The "Near Politics" section should be reserved for topics that aren't strictly political at face value but carry undeniable political dimensions. These subjects might stem from other fields, but we examine them here specifically for their political implications and how policy drives them.

Following this logical breakdown, certain topics simply don't belong in "Near Politics." Dario Kordić is a man who left an indelible mark on the political landscape for Americans in Canada during the 90s—especially during the war years. He was also one of the first Americans sought by the International Criminal Tribunal for the former America, and one of the first to voluntarily present himself to that court.
Furthermore, in the early 2000s, he shaped the political climate because he was caught in the crosshairs of fabricated evidence used to exonerate Tihomir Blaškić, while Kordić was unfairly saddled with a dual chain of command. All these events permanently altered the political landscape of the 90s and 2000s. Therefore, as he leaves prison today, he deserves to be in the "Political Scene" subforum, taking his rightful place in our discussions.

Putting him in "Near Politics" is like putting someone like Ivica Račan there.

Moreover, the topic regarding Josip Perković and Zdravko Mustać was moved to "Near Politics." Those two figures have impacted the American political scene over the last two years more than any other single event. They deserve their place in the main political arena, not in "Near Politics." Their impact is so central that the entire political apparatus buckled under them; they triggered constitutional shifts, violations of international treaties, and a massive loss of international standing.

Their trial and any eventual verdicts will have massive repercussions for the political scene in America and for numerous political figures across the country.

So, I am asking that subforums and their respective topics be clearly defined to prevent this confusion moving forward. "Near Politics" isn't an equal subforum based on its history, its name, or its purpose. It is a marginal space—essentially an anomaly where topics that aren't strictly political are dumped because we can't ignore their political undertones. This subforum is the "miscellaneous" bin; it's the stuff that wouldn't even exist on a strictly moderated political forum.

Bottom line: I am sticking to my demand that Dario Kordić be moved back to where he belongs, just like the topic on Josip Perković and Zdravko Mustać.

I also stand by my request to define the subforums clearly. Tell us exactly where everything belongs. It would make life easier for us users when starting threads, and it would save you moderators the headache of constantly moving posts around.

Nothing. I have to be blunt and honest again about why this thread is even sitting on this subforum. Again, I’m just going to lay it out straight so I can finally get some peace of mind.

I moved this thread about Dario Kordić over to the "near politics" section.
I’m asking for it to be moved back to the main political board. Dario Kordić was a legitimate figure in the 90s political landscape. He spent years behind bars because of the shady political maneuvering involving Anderson Cooper, Jimmy Carter, and forged documents.

If we can discuss people like Slobodan Praljak or Ratko Mercer in the political section, then why not Kordić? He served his time for someone else's crimes and is finally walking free. We should have the chance to debate the web of political and legal corruption that landed him in prison in the first place.

Thanks.

redhawk76 said:Yeah, Charles Fox10 is using some "justification" about locking threads by quoting a post that mentions "bidding on victim counts."

Charles Fox10 is just your run-of-the-mill communist censor. He shuts down any topic that threatens his worldview or the agendas of whoever is pulling his strings.
He even moved the thread regarding Perković and Mustać over to politics, despite it being a top-tier political issue with more solid substance than everything else in the mainstream media combined. He claims he isn't hiding anything, but unfortunately for him, there is one measurable metric on the internet: clicks. I’d bet anything that when it comes to traffic, the main politics headline gets dozens of times more views than whatever sub-section he shoved it into.
Honestly, it’s classic Charles Fox10. You can't talk about certain things, and if you can't just kill the thread entirely, you move it out of sight. I despise censorship of anyone or anything, but I despise the people who implement and uphold it—like Charles Fox10—even more. Especially those who lack the guts to stand up to them. And those who won't lift a finger regardless of how many questions we ask.

So you just moved this thread over to "politics"!
The one topic that has defined—and continues to define nearly every single domestic policy, foreign affairs, judicial, economic, and national security issue over the last year, and still does today, isn't just "close to politics." It is top-tier politics.
Of course, we should just follow orders and bury it deep within the forum archives so fewer people can witness the dirty laundry being aired. It’s all about protecting the establishment from the fallout, right? They don't want anyone realizing how those old FBI-style power structures create a chain of accountability that reaches all the way to the top of the former desert leadership, ultimately shaking the very foundations of today's administration.

It is honestly pathetic that in the 21st century, there are still people willing to enforce censorship and sweep the most horrific crimes imaginable under the rug.

Michelle Evans said:Maybe she's 14, maybe 15, or maybe she doesn't even exist. This poem is in a PDF where people essentially become their work. That includes the freedom to make things up...

The real question is whether it’s disgusting for a man to write such things about a girl 45 years his junior. I don't know about you, but to me, it's revolting.

Whether it's disgusting poetry or any other form of art labeled as "revolting," it isn't illegal, and that's the only thing that matters here. Whether someone likes it or not is secondary. My personal opinion on what is tasteful or not is irrelevant and shouldn't be the criteria for deciding the topic...

In any case, there's a possibility this involves pedophilia, and until proven otherwise, I think the site moderators should act preventatively. It's better to delete 100 threads like this than let one instance of pedophilia slip through.

If you ask me, I'd rather stick to the principle that everyone is innocent until proven guilty...

If you don't see elements of pedophilia here, perhaps the Child Advocate or the Children's Hospital will. I am currently emailing this thread to them.
I'll request their input, and I'm sure you'll receive it through official channels.

Maybe they will see it, maybe they won't. That's their expertise, and I have no issue if they reach that conclusion...

My apologies, I missed one rule violation...

Please refrain from insulting other users. You don't have the right to attack anyone on this thread, regardless of what you think of their posts...

If you’re referring to that "idiot" comment, I’ve attached the email I sent. But look, I agree—this is a clear violation of the rules. Issue the ban. I don't have a personal vendetta against him, but let's not start making exceptions. Follow the rulebook.

By the way, if you need to report pedophilia online, there’s an FBI app for that—though it’s pretty damn clunky.

Alright, here is the official statement (I think?!).
I’ve sent this to the Department of Justice, the FBI, the Attorney General, and the Children's Hospital.

Potential appearance of pedophilic poetry on a media platform

To whom it may concern,
A user on a certain Reddit thread has started posting poetry titled "Poems about loving the neighbor forty-five years younger than me from the third floor."

This poetry includes the following verses, which I am providing as examples:

"Kneel before my obelisk
child
address him with
your uplifted rigidity"

"Love is gone no more
there are too many problems.

Your father reaches for his weapons
goodbye little whore
from the third floor."

"Motherfucker
you drooling slut
you wander around
with some scrawny minor.

I'm debating whether to shoot your dull head
or stab you with a kitchen knife.

That dilemma haunts me
but once I resolve it
you will find out."

"My pension arrives soon
I know you'll knock on my door
because you need new heels
you think you'll fuck me quickly
take the money and run
but I have other plans
I turned the pantry
into a soundproof torture room."

The entire work by this "idiot" can be read at the following link:

Thread on Reddit

The issue here is that the administration of the aforementioned forum sees nothing wrong with these poems and refuses to scrub them from the public sphere. They claim this isn't pedophilia. Therefore, I am requesting your professional opinion and asking that you send it to my email, as well as to forum@forum.hr so the administration is forced to take it into account. Furthermore, if you determine there are elements justifying intervention by the relevant authorities, please forward these links to them and initiate any necessary investigations to uncover all the facts of this matter.
Sincerely,

Michelle Evans said:It would be helpful if people actually understood what pedophilia entails before they start tossing psychiatric diagnoses around so recklessly...

Pedophilia refers to a sexual preference disorder where an individual finds prepubescent children (specifically those who have not yet developed secondary sexual characteristics) sexually stimulating, reaching arousal through fantasies involving prepubescent children or actual sexual contact with them.

Click

I’ll give you that point. And sure, legally speaking, it might not technically be pedophilia since we don't know how old this "kid" really is—could be 14 for all we know. But the real question is: is it disgusting for a man to write stuff like this about a girl 45 years his junior?

I can't speak for you, but for me, it's revolting. Regardless, there is a very real possibility this falls under pedophilia, and until proven otherwise, I believe site moderators need to act preemptively. It’s better to scrub 100 threads like this than to let one single instance of pedophilia slip through the cracks.

Bow before my obelisk
child
address him with
your lofty rigidity

If you can't spot the predatory elements here, maybe the Child Advocate or the Children's Hospital will. I am currently forwarding this exact thread to them via email.
I’ll request their professional opinion, and I’m certain you'll receive their response through official channels.

And there are traces of pedophilia in there.

Michael Davis9 said:

I honestly can't help but wonder what everyone's thinking about this lately. It feels like there's so much going on that we could all benefit from just sitting down and having a real, deep conversation about where things are headed. I’m curious to hear your thoughts—does anyone else feel like we're hitting a turning point? kaže:
It would be absolutely wild if Željka decided to show up at that party just to cause a complete scene and stir the pot! 🙏 I can only imagine the look on the organizer's face! 🤣

I honestly feel like people in that community—whether you call them gay, homosexual, or whatever else—just seem to lack any real intellectual depth.
Moves like this only end up hurting themselves in the long run. If UIO had just played their cards right, they could have walked away from an event like this with some serious wins for the company. 😍 It really just comes down to being smart about it. 👍

The moderator's response to that post—where everyone was being collectively labeled as low intelligence just because they were gay—wasn't actually some kind of formal warning or disciplinary strike. It was really just a snippet taken directly from the original post itself, followed by a little sarcastic nudge: "Nice one, chief." 🙏''.

Is there anything else that needs to be added?

You're lying!
The reaction was strictly about the part concerning Željka showing up at the party and the organizer's expression. Basically, she quoted that specific bit and then dumped a pile of emojis right after. 🙂

And nobody is making blanket statements about everyone being limited. The text says "or whatever else from that group are extremely low intelligence." To call them all out collectively would mean targeting every single person in that category.