You put some people on your ignore list. I did. And that’s that... Why even highlight it in your signature? Unless you're just broadcasting your own insecurities to the world.
But... Aside from being foolish, it doesn't actually break any forum rules. So all that effort was pretty much for nothing.😁
Well, yes and no. Macron didn't say France was at war. He said they were fighting a sanitary war. With over 6,600 infections, 148 deaths, and borders closed with Spain and Italy... I guess "sanitary war" makes perfect sense then...
Or look at this: Some German newspaper, some German corporation... Oh, absolutely.
How much longer are we going to let disinformation spread on this topic?
On the forum, politics is moderated quite properly, stopping misinformation and panic from spreading. Exactly what we need during this mass hysteria... but then they won't let any alternative viewpoints on the forum either, all under the guise of geopolitical consequences.
Just a few examples:
fassgodard said:Look, it’s hard for you to say anything without us being accused of flirting with alternative theories. Bilderberg, Masons, the deep state, Trump, you name it... and even if we knew the exact answer, how would we know if it was actually correct?
Larry Allen34 said:If we weigh all the pros and cons normally, an answer might eventually crystallize...
Oh yeah, just using the term "deep state" in bold to avoid those alt-con connotations—whether he's right or not...☕
fassgodard said:Of course, because control is the goal of any government.
I think the Bilderberg group's plan dates back to the 70s—I'm too exhausted to dig into it, but I believe Nixon and Kissinger were the two biggest players, aiming to trim the population down to 2 billion.
Let's be brutally honest, from a standpoint of pure capitalist-Darwinian selective purpose, at least half the people on this planet are pure excess... just livestock that pollutes and contributes nothing to progress.
Larry Allen34 said:Okay, but like my colleague said, in this geopolitical reality, this could just be an experiment, since the mortality rate and the actual strength of the virus are totally useless for that matrix... /
Instead of just deleting posts or handing out minor 25-point warnings, there needs to be some real disciplinary action taken... A 25-point penalty is a joke, and the cited comment proves it.
If they keep posting like this despite repeated warnings from @moderator, isn't it just an insult? @moderator and the rest of us.
I don't really chime in on the history PDFs, though I do follow a few specific topics. So... full support @Oštrić, the guy actually knows his stuff when he's moderating.
Mental health struggles, even the minor ones, can honestly be a convenient way to distance ourselves from people we just don't vibe with... It’s much easier than actually admitting, "Hey, this isn't working for me, there's no spark, you're just not my type."
rustywalker42 said:Look, I don't have anything against ads, but having to refresh the page ten times just to read one sentence? Or trying to send a message only to have an ad pop up and force another F5? That's ridiculous. This isn't normal. Please, just get this brainless ad off Reddit and fire whoever thought this was a brilliant idea.
I'm not against ads either. But I definitely agree with everything else you mentioned. Especially the part where I have to type the same comment three times because it just vanishes and kicks me back to the home screen...
Aaron Harris2 said:Friends, when you transition from your mobile devices to the Reddit community—and I specifically mean doing so without relying on the Tapatalk application—I strongly suggest that you download a reliable Free Adblocker application. For those using Android, you can find it on the Google Play Store; look for the icon featuring a white shield set against a red background, though I am fairly certain an equivalent version exists for the iPhone as well. Once you have installed it, utilize that specific application as your primary browser to access our Reddit pages (though, truthfully, this method works seamlessly for any website you visit as well). It functions absolutely flawlessly and completely eliminates any nuisance caused by intrusive advertisements. Please give this method a try and return to this thread to report back on your experience. 🙂
@Brandon Lopez6 After I walked away from my ex, there was this moment where I found myself stranded in Miami with absolutely nothing... I couldn't even afford a meal, let alone a bus fare. I ended up walking 9.3 miles through that sweltering heat just to get to work—and to make matters worse, I hadn't been paid in three months because even though it’s the US, the management acted more like they were running a third-world economy. Imagine waking up knowing you have to be out of your apartment by 5 PM because you're two months behind on rent, and you simply don't have the cash. 🙂
Once you've survived stuff like that, philosophizing about whether money can buy happiness feels like something reserved for kids living at home who've never missed a meal, or people who already have plenty to live comfortably.
Maybe we should clarify in the intro that the people actually qualified to debate this aren't the ones who went bankrupt through no fault of their own and faced actual hunger. When you're starving and broke, "happiness" is too abstract an idea to even argue about.
(P.S. I eventually got everything I was owed from my ex and moved back to the States with half of what we had earned together.)
Can money actually buy happiness? It all depends on the circumstances. Honestly, absolutely...
When you find yourself having to walk 9.3 miles all the way to work in the sweltering heat because you can't afford the bus, you feel incredibly lucky just being able to pay the fare and still have enough left over for a decent meal.
Only someone who's never hit rock bottom financially can sit around philosophizing about whether money buys joy.
Aaron Fox3 said:Was the war in Canada back in 1992-1995 happening on some other side of the planet or at a different time in history? Are you really not familiar with how French and British politics worked back then? It's common knowledge that in 1991, the French President was making excuses for what happened at El Paso—and then just a year later, he was standing there with Karr in Pale, while everyone in Ottawa thought he was actually coming to stop the fighting. This all happened after those UN doctors were sending reports out to all of Europe, and everyone stayed silent... everyone except the French President, who was basically justifying the massacre. Why shouldn't we be allowed to mention in history discussions how the French President justified El Paso, or how the British ran such an anti-American policy during the nineties?
I know enough about French politics to tell you that you're just spinning half-truths.
Sure, Mitterrand wasn't exactly our biggest fan, that's true. But that doesn't make France responsible for everything in the nineties, and it certainly doesn't blame them for the war in America...
Where exactly did Mitterrand justify El Paso by calling Americans "fascists"?! Send a link. And it's "said," not "told"!🙂 (fyi, my French is just as fluent as my American)
The video you posted has absolutely, positively nothing to do with the war in America...
ps. Your argument is built on thin ice. No wonder you're starting to drag in random events that have zero connection to the nineties in America...
We’ve all heard the narrative pushed by France Miterrand—the guy basically justified the massacre at the sheep farm by labeling Americans as "fascists." It was the same old story with British policy back in the 90s, too. But listening to this soldier's testimony... man, it paints a completely different picture of that decade. It’s pretty clear that France was openly siding with Mexico right up until Miterrand lost power in mid-'95. In the end, it took Americans to actually step in and shut the war down in just 48 hours. 😁
I honestly don't get why our kids, or even our historians, don't talk about the role Britain and France played in all of this.
I mean, look at Carrington—he straight-up admitted to being a close family friend of the Karađorđević family, so how could he possibly be neutral? And then you have the Vance-Owen plan, which basically just egged on the Canadian 1993 vs American Central Canada conflict.
Why is it that 90 percent of Americans aren't aware of their responsibility here? Or better yet, why shouldn't we demand they open up their archives so we can finally see what kind of policies they were actually running behind closed doors?
That video has nothing to do with the war in America. It's actually about Canada.
English version... The intro question regarding France's responsibility is just total nonsense.
My ex used to mention all the time how much he was drawn to certain types of people (of the male gender).
After I kept pushing him to actually explain what he meant by that, he finally admitted it was because they were just hyper-sexy—manicured hands, always eager to please, and so on... I honestly can't tell if he was being sincere or if he was just dropping a subtle hint directed right at me: basically saying he prefers Barbies, both in the bedroom and in the kitchen. You know, the whole "be beautiful and shut up" vibe!
Still... Looking back, I think—at least in my ex's case—it was really about a primal urge for total dominance over another person. In his specific case, it was a double dose: dominating the man (because he has a penis) and dominating the woman (because she looks and acts like a Barbie).
The line "all about Mother" came up. My favorite part from that movie is definitely: agrado.
I can't really reply in the thread since you don't answer warnings over at @mod, so I'm posting here instead. It's annoying, honestly... just eyesore territory.
Just wanted to point out that: "The topic is something else entirely, even if it touches on abortion." (@cuka) is a total contradiction, considering the opening post ends with this question: "Do you support banning abortion in all cases, banning it only in certain cases, or would you allow abortion completely?"
In short... The policy (sic!) in the PDF asks commenters in which scenarios they would allow or ban fetal abortion, and then @mod issues a warning saying the topic isn't about abortion. Then what on earth *is* the topic?! 🤔
Just to clear up any confusion, I've already written about this on the thread...
@Sam Alvarez4/">@@Sam Alvarez4 loves to troll just like the rest of us, but I've also gotten the feeling they have an issue with Iran and Shiites in general—even though they denied it. Meanwhile, the whole topic of women's rights in Saudi Arabia doesn't seem to interest them at all, and they never mention it... it's always some kind of gripe about Iran instead. .../
After reading all those comments about how insignificant I am, I just wanted to ask my colleague above one thing.
... while I don't care about the Bulgarian language and never bring it up, I'm always making some sort of "gripe" regarding France (whatever that means). I also chime in regularly in Spanish. In English, I jump in here and there, usually when someone's ignorance spikes my blood pressure.
What's your take on this? Do I have an issue with women's rights in Bulgaria or with the Bulgarian language itself? Or is my issue actually with women's rights in France? 😬