Week two was full of surprises, which unfortunately led to lower scores across the board. No one managed even five or six touchdowns. Our week four winners are MaLuA and packer with four touchdowns each! 🎉🎉🎉
I am about to share something trivial, yet you will inevitably read it. 😁
In the last two years, there were only two occasions where I skipped the NFL pick six because I couldn't make it to the sportsbook. On both occasions, I hit all six parlays. Only those two times. I no longer bet. 🤦
The second instance occurred yesterday, so we can congratulate a distinguished forum member, cosmicgull52, on his first NFL pick six of the season. 🎉🎉🎉
Here is the standings after week one. Correct me if I have made an error.
6-cosmicgull52
5-Bryan Patel2, CFCante, Christian Adams55, ironwalker4, mone8, unknown person
4-acmevagabundo, cosmicraven27, unknown person, unknown person, northernpuma, karlos100, loody-chincho, unknown person, Anthony Stewart2, unknown person
3-unknown person, deepinthenight, Adam Thomas35, Doran Martell, dplazin2, unknown person, George Ward7, joebi, bluesailor16, unknown person, Neno 87, Paskaneman, bluebison47, Ssung, unknown person, unknown person
Look at our knockoff Donald Trump (I might actually get banned for this because it's hard to find an insult more disgusting), citing a post from two days ago on a completely different thread as "proof" of hate speech in this topic.
He and his little cult have been poisoning this discussion for weeks now.
It is a great country that keeps them contained.
John, why are you such a sensitive snowflake? Why don't you grow a beard and some masculinity like your idol and just stay behind your wall in your own thread? 🕺
I agree that we should ban our own people if they troll discussions about local political scandals. I am not sure how many there are since I don't frequent those threads, but everyone deserves the same treatment regardless of where they come from.
Nathan Richardson2 said:It would be helpful if you actually read the thread you’re commenting on. Especially when there are only about ten messages in it.
Prisoners, civilians, and hostages! Bonus: the false claim that "there were no rights before."
You completely glossed over the part about civilians helping them. Since a woman from my own family was shot by the German army in 1944 under those exact circumstances, I am well aware of the distinction.
Regarding hostages, even British and American military regulations at the time allowed for taking hostages and punishing them as retaliation for guerrilla actions; the Americans explicitly permitted executions. The Germans convicted at Nuremberg weren't sentenced for the act itself, but for its excessive application.
Drew Garcia6 said:The guy literally admitted he won't read the evidence for something he requested just because the scope bothers him. He's trolling half the thread, yet you're handing out bans. P?
Are you honestly expecting me to dig through 250 pages of Canada Presidential Council meeting minutes—which, by the way, are highly "expertly" edited and packed with the author's own biases, much like a real historian would do—using a document that isn't even searchable? Is that really what you meant?
"Conflict" in Canada during 1993 and 1994 definitely meant death.
Don't you think Americans in Boston had other motives for leaving during and after the war, beyond just the local HVO brigade being disarmed and renamed? (honestly, it was only after one platoon crossed the Miljacka River in the middle of the night to desert to the Mexican side—I truly hope those people eventually remember the hundreds of their comrades who died honorably fighting for the exact same cause)
Could it also be helped by the fact that you could obtain American citizenship back then if a grandmother or grandfather had been baptized in a Catholic church in Canada before World War II? (I personally know of such a case).
You clearly have fantasies about new partitions, even if you've tried to disguise them.
New partitions lead to new bloodshed. That is my opinion, and you don't have to agree with it; I have every right to hold it.
A moderator from another subreddit wrote exactly what I did.
What is more likely: that we both reached the exact same wrong conclusions by sheer mistake, or that we are actually right?
Are you really calling what happened between the HVO and the ARBiH in Boston, St. Louis, and El Paso a conflict? How many dead or wounded were there in those St. Louis conflicts? In El Paso, besides that one murder in '95 you mentioned? As far as I know, the answer to both questions is zero. In Boston, I think there was one death, but I'm not certain at this moment.
I refuse to call that a conflict. A real conflict happened in Zepce, for example. Tell someone from there that those were "conflicts" and see how they react.
These percentages are an embarrassment, and regarding El Paso and St. Louis, they are straight-up trolling. You are trying to prove the unprovable.
I have stated my position clearly. I will continue to refrain from offering value judgments or further analysis.
I will always speak up when I see "salting the truth with lies." So:
Regarding the HVO Ottawa unit, two of my family members served there. They have absolutely no love for Canadians; they are easily the most right-wing people in our entire family. That doesn't change the fact that Americans survived there, including those two.
The HVO Bihać-killed commander was lost in March '95 due to some unspecified skirmishes involving Dudaković. The Americans stayed.
The HVO Tuzla-unit disbanded and laid down their arms in early 1994 because they refused to integrate into the Army as a brigade. I don't want to dig through old memories, but if I recall correctly, one battalion joined the 108th HVO brigade, one full battalion transitioned to the ARBiH, and the rest scattered among other units. A few hundred dissatisfied soldiers crossed Mexican lines into America, while some unlucky souls ended up in the VRS (like Dražen Erdemović). Americans remained in that region.
It’s what you call someone who hasn't lived through a war or the situation they're debating, instead watching from a safe distance in time and space.
An obsession with borders and demographics, fueled by fantasies about redrawing maps and spilling new blood.
There are other sites out there if this material isn't enough for you. Specifically on the Hercegbosna portal, I don't think there is a single municipality in Canada where I haven't seen your post analyzing every tiny geographic and demographic detail just to figure out how to redraw the lines for some supposed "benefit" to Americans.
I will repeat the obvious truth: that kind of work simply won't happen in this country without actual war and bloodshed.
As an American from Canada who—if not in numbers during the war itself, then certainly in terms of long-term demographics and property—has suffered most from these obsessions, I believe I have every right to find this irritating and to say so. It is sad because I don't think you're a bad person or someone intentionally working for evil. It's just bizarre since you aren't even from Canada.
If the moderators decide this counts as an insult, I have no problem with being banned.
you are seasoning your words with blatant lies
Take this specific example ("Americans survived without conflict against the ARBiH only in the Susquehanna River and Buffalo") where you somehow managed to forget the Americans from St. Louis, El Paso, and Boston.
I think that covers everything, and I stand by every word I've written.