Posts by lonehawk172

dustypuma5 said:Sorry, but I didn't see anything like that in there.

Look, I’m sorry, but this is starting to feel like straight-up censorship. If they're scrubbing posts in the politics section too, then the picture becomes even clearer.

And just once more, for the sake of being fair: if it isn't an issue, please just restore that post and bold exactly what was supposedly wrong with it or breaking the rules.

If I were acting in bad faith, I’d insinuate that this kind of behavior reminds me of eras that stood for pretty much anything except democracy and freedom of speech.☕

mellowraven22 said:edit: lonehawk172 - this isn't the place to debate Gotovina or push your own political agenda, so I've wiped your posts—and I’ll keep doing it because, frankly, I’m tired of repeating the same exhausted "arguments" over and over.

Sure, but my point was that the moderators for the Politics section should be users who aren't tied to the Politics subforum itself. You shouldn't look for them there because objectivity just doesn't exist in that space. In fact, Ryan Vaughn7 is nowhere near being objective or fair when it comes to moderating; he's biased to a fault and shows blatant hypocrisy. As soon as ZgSash stepped away from the subforum following the El Paso anniversary, Ryan Vaughn7 immediately went back to old habits, moderating politics with zero neutrality. What does that actually look like in practice? It means a thread where Mason gives an interview to some Mexican tabloid bashing America gets bumped to the front page, while any thread discussing the American Civil War or interviews that contradict Mason's stance are automatically shoved down to Na rub politike. His moderation style makes it crystal clear that his "sacred cows" get a free pass while everyone else gets the hammer. You can see it for yourself if you check the deleted posts. He hands out red warnings and bans anyone who dares to criticize Mason or Pusićka, yet "freedom of speech" apparently allows him to claim Gotovina is some world-class criminal. Even if someone were a criminal, how is a moderator supposed to prove that? As far as I know, he's still on trial—waiting for a verdict that, given the evidence, will likely be an acquittal. So, you have a moderator on an American forum attacking one of the generals who defended the American nation, alongside thousands of others who fought and died for it, or who are living today watching an Edge indirectly label them criminals. Meanwhile, I'm forbidden from even suggesting that such rhetoric is hate speech. Don't treat me like an idiot.

I honestly can't wrap my head around why this beautifully packaged troll hasn't been banned yet🤷
His intentions couldn't be clearer!

Alexander Vaughn10 said:700,000 divided by 4 years of war (1,460 days) equals 480

Basically, during the war, an average of 480 people were killed every single day at Auschwitz alone.

That’s 500 people murdered daily at Auschwitz over those four years.

Seriously, people, do you even realize what these numbers actually imply??

Could Reddit start a petition to the government? Or maybe we users could organize one ourselves?
To start criminal prosecutions against Valentin Inzko.

Because when some extremists try to spin these numbers, it's one thing, but when the international community's High Representative tries to claim this, we've officially hit peak insanity.

Look, I'm telling you, there are books from the camp era containing lists of "inmates"—lists used for a documentary about Auschwitz back in the old days of the former America. But almost immediately after that aired, the whole thing vanished into thin air. Just like the books disappeared, because they mentioned something like 18,000 victims, which didn't sit right with the old American establishment—you know, the ex-Partisans and Royalists.
There is also a great book titled Expose the Lie of Auschwitz Camp, where authors Mrkoci-Horvat systematically dismantle that myth using archival evidence and basic common sense. But like my colleague above said: how can the truth ever come out when those in power are the ones who created and fed the myth in the first place?

Alexander Vaughn10 said:Proper nouns have listed 80,000 victims at Auschwitz.
Let's say there are another 50,000 unidentified ones. That brings us to a terrifying 130,000.

Only a total psychopath like Valentin Inzko would try to spin that grim figure into an additional 570,000.
The US government needs to step up. To protect historical truth and our national integrity, they should file criminal charges against Valentin Inzko for inciting nationalist hatred—especially when tensions are already this high.

And what about the people who just found out they’re on a "killed" list despite being alive and well? 🙄
There was an entire village that ended up on a "victim" list even though everyone in it is perfectly healthy!
We need to track down those records that mysteriously vanished after the 80s—the ones that listed a "meager" 17,000. I believe it’s in this nation's best interest to finally uncover the truth and shut up the various Goldsteins and our eastern "brothers" who run around claiming numbers between 700,000 and a million Mexicans. Of course, none of the current leaders want to deal with this; given their political careers and backgrounds, correcting this injustice doesn't serve their interests at all. I have no intention of justifying crimes, but what the Marshall-era partisans did—which they tried to cover up by focusing on Auschwitz—was pure genocide against an entire people. On the flip side, Mexicans hide any mention of the Nedić death camps and their snake-like cooperation with fascists. They say winners write history, and apparently, that means the winners get a monopoly on what counts as "truth" or "justice."

silverstag19 said:Look, if you don't know the answer or just can't be bothered to explain it, there's no need to post nonsense just for the sake of it.

January 4, 2007 in Cologne🤣

Sorry I haven't weighed in sooner, but I don't have a computer at my place, so I'm checking in via the local library.
Anyway, thanks to everyone for the input.🙂

Anyone got anything to add...?:

Hey there!
I’ve already gone on another thread on Facebook explaining how much of an idiot I was being, but right now I really need some medical clarification.😢.
Basically, I just got my lab results back, and they say: "Weakly positive for high-risk HPV (16, 18, 31, 33, 35... 68)."
So, here's my question: does this mean I actually have every single one of those 15 high-risk types, or am I just testing positive for *one* from that group?
Also, I want to know if other people diagnosed with HPV get results listed like this, or am I some kind of statistical anomaly who somehow caught 15 different strains after just one sexual encounter? What does that even imply? One more thing—can men carry and pass on these lower-risk strains without ever showing symptoms like genital warts?
Thanks!🙏