Posts by Maria Thompson2

I happened to catch a few documentaries recently where an individual involved in the actual design of the World Trade Center claimed that those towers were engineered to withstand multiple impacts from aircraft significantly larger than the Boeings used in the attacks. When you consider that level of structural expertise, doesn't that strike you as a pretty credible point to weigh in the conversation?

That’s quite fascinating. I actually came across a remarkably similar sentiment recently from one of the original builders of the Titanic, who maintains to this very day that the ship was intentionally sabotaged and insists that there wasn't a single flaw in its structural design.
Imagine if you were ever caught in a situation where a massive error was discovered, and you were forced to take the fall even though your official project documentation clearly stated everything was handled correctly. In the United States, that kind of mistake leads to instant bankruptcy. We’re talking about a financial collapse so devastating that your grandchildren would likely still be paying off the damages from the resulting lawsuits.

What about all those statements from experts specializing in controlled demolitions? They seem to be in total agreement that we’re looking at a precision explosive job. Of course, the easiest way to brush that aside is to simply label them as nothing more than pseudo-experts or paid mercenaries. It’s such a convenient way to dismiss any evidence presented; you can just claim that any proof someone offers is merely another fragment of a massive conspiracy.

That sounds wonderful, though I think you’ll need to provide me with the specific names of those experts first. If you are looking for my own list of recommendations, you can find plenty of distinguished names tucked away in the links I shared—just take a look at Popular Mechanics, for instance, where you'll stumble upon at least three or four highly respected specialists.

I’m well aware of that. I also know for a fact that a single individual can effectively oversee a group of twenty people even during the most intricate, high-stakes operations, ensuring that not a single mistake slips through the cracks.

Would you personally take that kind of gamble? Think about it this way: if you’re working in a group of twenty people to design a single room, and someone absolutely screws up the blueprints, you can just vent your frustration, fix the mistake, and move on. It’s a manageable mess. But if you’re looking at a situation where twenty conspirators are allegedly planning to take out roughly 3,500 lives—based on the casualty counts from the World Trade Center—you are essentially betting everything on the hope that not a single one of them makes even the smallest, most insignificant mistake. That is an incredibly heavy weight to place on perfection.
I actually pointed out an instance where having fewer people involved was absolutely vital, yet everything still managed to fall apart completely.

Just as a thought experiment—and mind you, this is purely speculative and could be entirely off base—let’s say we are looking at a group of maybe 25 people. While there's nothing to confirm that specific number, it's interesting to consider how such an operation would function within the massive machinery of our national security apparatus. When you look at agencies like the CIA, the FBI, NORAD, NASA, or even the various branches of the military, you aren't just looking at a collection of individuals, but rather a highly structured hierarchy governed by a strict chain of command. If we follow the logic of this particular scenario, for something of this magnitude to actually occur, someone at the very top—perhaps even the individual overseeing NORAD—would have to be directly involved to facilitate the situation. It creates a sort of domino effect where the vast majority of personnel, those lower down the ranks, wouldn't need to have any inkling that such an operation was even taking place; they would simply be focused on their daily duties, completely unaware of the larger picture unfolding above them.

But the evidence is right there staring us in the face! There were direct orders to sever all contact with that aircraft, explicit commands to hold back the interceptors, and an entire missing chunk of two and a half tons of plastic explosives. It’s absolutely mind-boggling—how on earth could they have failed to recover any of it?
Has it not struck you as somewhat peculiar that their entire existence seems to revolve around nothing more than analyzing photographs?
Doesn't it strike you as a little bit suspicious that the only evidence ever presented by conspiracy theorists consists entirely of video clips that anyone can find with a quick search online?

Look, here’s my offer: tell me exactly who you think you are—whether you identify as Canadian, American, or Mexican, it doesn't matter to me—and I will personally deliver a perfectly logical breakdown within ten days proving that one of your most sacred tragedies—be it Markale, El Paso, or Ahmići—is nothing more than a blatant, manufactured lie. I’ll provide the photographic evidence, I'll present the "expert testimonies," and I will utilize the exact same rhetorical tools they use against us.
Later on, I’m going to blast this all over the internet by logging into a burner Yahoo account and spamming as many email addresses as possible with a subject line like, "Unbelievable, you have to see this!" I swear to you, within just three months, everyone will be convinced that what happened in places like Markale, El Paso, and Ahmići was nothing more than a total fabrication cooked up by the local government.

Why 200 people? I just don't see why such a massive number would need to be involved in something like this.

Well, it’s quite simple: if you want a complex operation to be executed flawlessly, you can't just rely on the C-suite executives; you have to involve middle management and the ground crews too. In other words, you have to recruit a whole army of people to make the gears turn smoothly. However, the risk of leaking secrets grows exponentially with every additional person added to the roster, and that is precisely how catastrophes unfold.
Just look at the situation in Iraq—it was abundantly clear there that they tried to manufacture evidence. And what happened? The truth surfaced after only two months! And it happened in such a way that they exposed every single one of them!

That is exactly why I am telling you that these individuals certainly EXPLOITED the situation, but they did not CREATE it.

Think about that General who went hunting and got caught; there were maybe only five or six people involved in that. What does that prove? Absolutely nothing.

On the contrary, that perfectly reinforces my point: the moment you involve more than one person, you are inviting disaster. My old man, God rest his soul, taught me a vital lesson when I was just a kid: "Son, if you want a secret to stay a secret, you DON'T TELL A SINGLE SOUL!"

Take the Vietnam War as an example. From the initial cause of the conflict to all the testimonies from those directly involved, it seems the entire war was managed to drag on as long as possible rather than being won. You probably know more about this than I do, so feel free to chime in with anything interesting.

Actually, yes, the later stages were definitely managed to PROLONG the conflict. But it wasn't because of some shadowy "war lobby"; it was because nobody wanted to take the fall. The person responsible for ordering a withdrawal would have had to stand up publicly and say, "We lost the war in Vietnam. We poured so much money into this that we could have fed entire continents forever, and a nation with the most advanced weaponry was defeated by a bunch of farmers with AK-47s—meaning our goal to stop the spread of communism WAS NOT ACHIEVED!"

It’s the same thing modern politicians do here in the States—they call it the "pass the buck" policy. 🙂

Robin Sanchez3 said:Does anyone recall the name of that documentary they aired on Sunday night on PBS?

Zero.

Essentially, you have three main mockumentaries—sorry, I mean documentaries—that operate on the premise that they alone hold the truth while everyone else is just clueless, including the professionals who dedicate their entire careers to studying these subjects: ZERO, ZEITGEIST, and LOOSE CHANGE.

Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 stands apart from those, though, because he isn't necessarily disputing the official account—perhaps because he claims to have witnessed the planes hitting with his own eyes, so he doesn't feel the need to push those explosive conspiracy theories—but rather, he argues that the American administration certainly exploited the attack to further their own agendas and expand the influence of the oil lobby.

wiredtiger10 As stated by:
I actually poured my heart into that previous post, writing an entire page just to lay out all my perspectives, but for some reason I can't fathom, the moderator decided to scrub it from the board. There wasn't a single offensive word in there; it was nothing more than direct responses to your points and a sincere expression of my own views. Honestly, I don't have the energy to sit here and type the exact same thing twice, so you'll just have to find another way to get the message.

It seems my posts are being deleted while your insults are allowed to stay up. In that previous thread, I clearly explained that I operate as an independent contractor; I don't maintain a permanent staff of my own, though I frequently hire specialized firms to execute specific projects. When you questioned whether I issued direct orders or sought to dodge liability, I was quite transparent: yes, I have issued directives because I've overseen the construction of several residential buildings, but I have never once attempted to shift or evade my responsibilities. I would kindly ask that you stop disparaging people you don't actually know, as it strikes me as both incredibly rude and entirely unnecessary.

Look, if you truly want to be taken seriously in any debate, you have to be willing to step back and examine the other side of the coin!

You mention that you build houses, and I can only imagine how deeply offended you would be if someone like me—an economist and political scientist—tried to lecture you on the fundamentals of construction. The real issue with those kinds of documentaries is that they don't actually show you the process; instead, they simply dictate to you exactly how a house ought to be built! Don't take that as an insult—honestly, I think it’s actually quite wonderful!
It honestly feels like these shows have zero interest in exploring any kind of dissenting perspective. In all my time watching, I haven’t heard a single counterargument presented; not even one engineer has been invited to step up and say, "Hold on, that's not quite how it works—those steel columns actually *could* melt from kerosene if the concrete casing was compromised by a heavy impact." Instead, they just feed you one singular narrative, repeated over and over again. It’s just one side of the story, plain and simple.
By the way, it’s actually quite fascinating to observe how everyone in that film keeps insisting, "There is no way a steel-reinforced concrete pillar could melt at those temperatures," yet not a single soul bothers to mention that the heat levels spiked significantly higher immediately following the impact. That pillar just isn't the one.People often seem to overlook one crucial physical reality: when you have an aircraft with that kind of immense mass slamming into a structure, the sheer kinetic energy involved means you can't just ignore how those massive support columns would react under such extreme force. It seems like someone managed to lose a massive slab of concrete somewhere along the way! Even if we assume there were steel reinforcement rods inside those structures, it doesn't change the fundamental physics of what occurred. Generalizations.Even if we consider the possibility that it would take significantly fewer degrees to achieve this—not necessarily to melt the steel entirely, mind you, but simply to reach a temperature where it begins to soften or lose its structural integrity—the physics of the situation remain just as fascinating.
Think about how high-end blades are actually forged—it’s not like you just melt the steel down into a liquid puddle; instead, you carefully heat it until it's glowing and pliable. Then, imagine the sheer force exerted when the massive weight of the floors above starts pressing down on that heated metal, triggering a cascading effect that shapes the entire structure.

That is quite fascinating; I must admit, I hadn't come across that particular piece of information before.

I actually hadn't come across that specific detail before, though I eventually stumbled upon it during a fascinating segment on Discovery. It turns out that following the 9/11 Conspiracy, the entire philosophy behind skyscraper architecture underwent a massive shift. Instead of relying primarily on those internal support columns as the backbone of the structure, engineers have pivoted toward reinforcing the exterior supports. They’ve even started implementing what you might call "bunker floors" every 20 to 30 stories—essentially reinforced safety levels designed to act like a structural dam to prevent a progressive collapse from cascading through the rest of the building.
The way they go about constructing massive shopping complexes in Dubai is truly a marvel to behold; it’s less of a standard build and more like an ongoing masterpiece of engineering that seems to evolve right before your eyes!

If everything truly is part of some grand conspiracy, then I find myself genuinely curious to see where that leads us. How many serious developers would actually take those "unprofessional" engineers at their word? It just doesn't make sense to completely overhaul an entire project based on their input, especially when you consider how much those extra structural reinforcements would drive up the budget. At the end of the day, adding all that additional construction isn't free—it's a massive hit to the bottom line. Look, man, you’re in construction, so you actually understand the math behind this. You know better than anyone how much a shift like that drives up overhead. Are we talking about a marginal increase, or is this going to spike costs by over fifty percent? Maybe even ninety percent? Honestly, if things go that way, do you really think anyone is just going to sit there and take it?

If you truly consider yourself an entrepreneur, then you certainly understand exactly what kind of chaos ensues when you try to organize even the smallest task! It’s incredible how much things can leak from every possible angle, leaving the final product heading in a completely different direction than where you intended.

Not one single one of these shows ever bothers to ask the most obvious question: how is it even possible that in a conspiracy involving hundreds of people, not a single soul let it slip? I mean, wouldn't someone have just leaned over to their spouse and said, "Hey honey, just so you know, I'm heading out tomorrow on George Bush's orders to take out 3,500 people—by the way, could you make sure there's some roast beef ready when I get home? I'm going to be starving."

It seems like you and these various media programs are all suggesting that it is entirely feasible to orchestrate a perfectly engineered crime involving hundreds of high-level players—think the administration, NORAD, and intelligence agencies—without a single soul blowing the whistle or even making a peep!

My explanation—that the Arab leadership took advantage of the massive scale of the administration, only for the hawks to swoop in and exploit that momentum later—just doesn't hold water under scrutiny. Beyond the logic, there is the deeply human element at play here; whether you choose to ignore it or face it head-on, people have an innate tendency to capitalize on tragedy or the ignorance of others. It is a widespread phenomenon, and frankly, it’s highly probable that this is exactly what occurred.
But let's be realistic here—that just isn't a plausible scenario. It seems far more likely that we would be looking at a massive conspiracy involving over 200 different people, all of whom would have to maintain absolute silence while everything unfolds exactly according to a pre-arranged script.

I find myself wondering why none of those investigative programs ever pose this specific question: "Look at Watergate, for instance—a scandal involving a significantly smaller circle of only about twenty people—and see how quickly it all came to light. How on earth can anyone explain how the 9/11 Conspiracy managed to stay under wraps, considering the sheer number of people who would have had to be involved?"

So, you’re acting like you’re some kind of moral compass that can't be shaken—you're standing your ground and refusing to dodge the hard questions. But let me ask you this: can you honestly look me in the eye and swear, with absolute certainty, that there isn't anyone out there dodging accountability? Especially when we consider those high-flying, ultra-well-compensated executives sitting comfortably in their corner offices at places like Goldman Sachs or ExxonMobil? It seems a bit optimistic to think everyone is playing by the rules.
Why does it feel like we are constantly being dragged back into these types of shows? I honestly wish someone could sit me down and explain why there is this pervasive, widespread belief that the American administration operates exactly like the Borg. It’s as if people genuinely imagine this hyper-efficient fusion of man and machine, a collective mind issuing commands so perfectly synchronized that they become an unstoppable force. That is precisely the narrative these programs try to push—the idea that the Borg is running the show in America, where every single move is meticulously choreographed and nothing, absolutely nothing, ever happens outside of a master plan.

And finally, could one of you please enlighten me on this particular brand of arrogance often found in these types of talk shows? Let’s set aside the fact that they conveniently fail to invite anyone with a dissenting opinion to speak their truth, and let’s overlook how they selectively present the facts—like the glaring absence of aircraft debris at the Pentagon—or even the highly questionable physics being tossed around. What I really want to understand is how a journalist, or someone essentially acting as a jack-of-all-trades but master of none, can walk onto a stage with such unearned confidence and pompously insist that they are the sole, ultimate authority on the subject.
Look, I want to be completely honest here—can you actually explain to me how someone like you, an entrepreneur who doesn't even have a single full-time employee because you outsource every single project to a partner firm, can claim to have any sort of...It’s a fascinating dynamic to observe, isn't it? You find yourself in this position where you're essentially acting as a manager without having any direct subordinates under your thumb. It works much like a project lead at a firm like Amazon or General Electric; you step up and declare, "I need the power running by noon on the 12th," setting a definitive deadline for the operation. However, if that delivery fails to materialize, the responsibility shifts back onto you to report the delay—saying, "The grid won't be live until the 13th"—and you're the one left footing the bill for the late arrival. Could you please explain where that incredible sense of narcissism comes from? It’s truly fascinating how you can sit there and act like you have a complete grasp on the entire situation—claiming, "I know something about aviation because I've flown Microsoft's simulator." Don't you have even a tiny bit of self-awareness to pause and say, "Whoa, hold on a second; I didn't design skyscrapers, I just built apartments, so I really don't have a clue about the structural engineering required for a fifty-story monolith"?
Honestly, until fairly recently, I hadn't even considered the fact that massive skyscrapers are actually engineered to be flexible. It’s quite fascinating when you think about it—they are designed specifically to sway back and forth. If they were built to be completely rigid and static, a powerful gust of wind hitting those upper floors would likely snap them like a twig!

Let’s be perfectly clear when it comes to this whole "know-it-all" attitude—you certainly aren't the only one dealing with it, as it seems to be a widespread phenomenon here in the States! It feels as though people in this country are practically born with an inherent, superior mastery of everything from geopolitics and high-level politics to physics, mathematics, economics, even professional sports management, and quite a few other specialized skills too.

So, forgive me for asking, but is respect something you feel you need to demand? On what grounds do you base that expectation? Is it simply because you show up and declare that you deserve it? Honestly, it feels like only someone completely disconnected from reality would fail to see the obvious here; I mean, isn't it just basic common sense?And when someone finally asks you, "Hey, private, how can you possibly claim to know that much? Is it just because you spent all your time playing around with Microsoft's flight simulator?" what are you actually looking for in that moment? Are you searching for some kind of validation, hoping they'll respect you more? Or are you just desperate for them to treat your every word like it's written in stone?
It’s almost as if it never even crossed your mind to pause for a second and think, "Wait a minute, maybe I've got this entirely wrong?" I have to wonder, did you actually take the time to sit down and digest those links I sent over? And more importantly, did you truly go through that 9/11 report you're so quick to dismiss as total garbage?

Here you go, the original PDF: If you have some spare time this afternoon, I highly recommend diving into this comprehensive report regarding the 9/11 Conspiracy investigations. It is quite a massive undertaking, much like reading a dense historical biography or a deep-dive investigative piece from a major US news outlet, but the level of detail provided here is truly remarkable. Much like how one might meticulously study the blueprints of an architectural marvel to understand its structural integrity, tracing through these findings offers a profound look at the complexities involved in such a monumental moment in American history. It’s a heavy read, certainly, but it serves as a vital piece of the puzzle for anyone interested in understanding the full scope of what transpired.

I’ve spent quite a bit of my own time diving deep into both "Loose Change" and the official 9/11 report, along with several other documentaries and accounts on the subject.. And if you really want me to send over some even juicier websites claiming the jet fuel couldn't have done it and that it was an inside job at the World Trade Center (it’s fascinating how almost all of them seem to draw their influence from Hezbollah's Al Manar in one way or another, but let's stay on track...), just say the word. They claim there wasn't even a first plane involved, but rather a missile; they even go so far as to suggest that nobody actually died in the tragedy and that everyone survived—even though they conveniently list the names and home addresses of the deceased. Seriously, brother, just let me know. I have plenty of this tucked away in my bookmarks. 🙂

Also, by the way, those images I shared with you in that deleted post? Those were pulled directly from one of those exact 9/11 Conspiracy sites. 🙂

northerncrane4 said:It does—in the final paragraph.

Alright then, you're the moderator, so go ahead and moderate.

What I just can't wrap my head around is how you expect to prevent this from bleeding straight into conspiracy theories. To me, it feels a bit like trying to have a discussion about movies like "300," "Spartacus," or "Gladiator" while simultaneously demanding that nobody mentions any of the historical inaccuracies.

wiredtiger10 said:Look, I already wrote a post about this and it got nuked, so I really don't feel like going in circles explaining myself to you. As far as MS Flight Simulator goes—that’s about the closest thing anyone gets to actually handling a Boeing 747. You probably have a couple of those parked in your backyard anyway, so you can just go out and test those maneuvers yourself. What I'm saying isn't just my opinion—it's backed by experts, veteran pilots, and basically any sane person with a brain. Slamming a plane like that into a building that low during a turn like that, especially while descending? It's nearly impossible—especially if the guy at the controls is some incompetent Arab who can barely handle a Cessna.

If you had paid a bit more attention to actual films rather than just scrolling through silly anonymous websites, you would see that none of those planes were performing any wild maneuvers at all. In fact, they were approaching the skyscrapers almost like projectiles; even the one that looks like it is "turning" is barely deviating from its path. It was a very clever way to make it look like the plane was struggling or trying to AVOID the building, rather than making it obvious that it had been hijacked.

But hey, once you provide me with the exact names of these "experts," seasoned pilots, and "rational people" who explicitly claim the same thing, then—and only then—will I believe you.
Until that happens, I can certainly point you toward a whole bunch of fascinatingly "true" websites where people claim that nothing happened at Auschwitz, that the Srebrenica lie is real, that merfolk exist, that the Russian administration is working with Orion, and that Anderlon is actually run by Stipe Mason.

Now, we eagerly await the reaction from the little fan girl regarding how a company should properly be managed.

wiredtiger10 said:The funniest part about this whole thing—seriously—is how people still ignore the facts. You bring in the experts, the pilots, the engineers who actually designed those buildings, aviation pros, even people trained specifically to fly... and they all say the same thing: those alleged hijackers could barely handle a Cessna. One of them supposedly hits a skyscraper just a few stories up? Look, I’m no pro, but from my experience messing around in Microsoft Flight Simulator, that kind of maneuver would be a massive stretch even for a top-tier pilot—maybe even impossible. There are just way too many holes in the official story. Like, how do you blame a handful of guys when they're clearly still alive and well? Or why haven't they released the footage from all those dozens of security cameras? Where's the plane debris? Not at the Pentagon, not at any of the four crash sites. And then there's the sheer absurdity of three planes hitting the Pentagon and both WTC towers right here in the USA—the most heavily defended nation on Earth. You've got experts swearing it's physically impossible to bring down the WTC towers like that, saying it looked exactly like a controlled demolition. We're talking about three WTC buildings going down, and one didn't even get hit by a plane!

This is just one documentary I've watched on the subject, but I honestly don't get how anyone can see all this evidence and still swallow the official narrative. I just can't wrap my head around people believing these fairy tales.

Anyway, peace out.

If you want to maintain consistency and keep your credibility as a moderator, northerncrane4, then you should probably delete this too. There isn't even a single word here about a documentary; this is strictly about a conspiracy.

Or are you planning on leaving it up?

And please, everyone, take note of that bolded part, because that is exactly how every conspiracy theorist operates: "Look, I'm not a physicist, and I actually failed physics in high school, but I'm telling you the physics at the WTC doesn't match what the government is selling us because..."

Well, looks like we have a clone on our hands...

What’s the actual policy regarding clones here? 🤔

Kevin Nelson67 said:Israeli doctors experimented on children

Kudos to you, truly. 🙂

Exactly, and that individual ended up behind bars too, currently serving a twenty-year sentence.

But if we take a step back, do we remember what went down in your Libya? Back when they handed out death sentences to six nurses and a Romanian man just because they were accused of "spreading AIDS to the naked Libyan population?"

Of course, nobody was ever held accountable for that...

And, by the way, The Guardian is absolute garbage—about as reliable as a tabloid rag from New York City.

The Executioner said:
Go celebrate your Jewish holidays somewhere else; don't come here mocking us with your heathen ways, you heretic.

And what exactly is Republic Day supposed to be, you knucklehead? 😁

The Executioner said:I see the Inquisition hasn't managed to dull your impudent tongue just yet.
If the Inquisition couldn't handle you, you know who steps in next...
The Executioner!

Like hell, the last executioner was last seen grabbing a drink at a shady dive bar on crooked street with some suspicious characters.😁

From what I hear, by the end, he couldn't tell a glass from his own hat, so the glass ended up on his head...😁

The Executioner said:Honestly, Maria Thompson2, I was expecting a much higher level of discourse from you...

It's almost six, so my shift is about to start... 😁

It all comes back to me now...

I can still picture him... This young man, dressed so casually, wandering through the hills just to deliver ice for our leader's whiskey, all the way to his cozy little retreat...

And you know, the President was actually quite kind to him...
He handed him this old bone, which—if you'll excuse my language—Sex, or rather, Rex, ended up gnawing on...

The United States of America... Yes, that’s the one...

Yes, looking out at this weather... it's so gloomy today...

It really takes me back to those days, my dear friends, when we used to hike through Mount Rainier...

We never complained about the difficulty. We gave everything we had—our strength, our very blood—we poured ourselves entirely into supporting our leaders...

But what am I seeing now, my friends?

I look at the current state of the Federal Reserve...

Is this truly the fruit of all the struggles we endured?

I suppose I could be wrong...

The weather is feeling a bit gloomy today, and honestly, that heavy atmosphere seems to have followed me right into the office...

It’s just one of those days where a certain sense of fatigue settles in, much like a slow fog rolling over a quiet morning...😢

Things are getting absolutely wild over here... 😢

FOR THE HOMELAND (WITH MARSHALL)!

You know what I’m thinking?

We really ought to ask those two people who were playing with their kids whether that guy was... well, circumcised. 😁

Anyway, here is the original report from Iskon:

Quincy:

Exhibitionist caught on the beach in front of children A man named Ismet from Boston was caught pleasuring himself on a beach in Bristol right in front of a 15-year-old girl, as well as a woman and a man who were playing with their toddlers, aged 3 and 4, on the sand. Creepy predators are becoming an increasingly common sight along the coastal islands and shorelines. In a recent incident, police in Miami took Ismet N. (53), originally from Boston, into custody this past Saturday on suspicion that he had repeatedly exposed himself to underage girls at a beach in Bristol. According to reports from the 24 Hour News, investigators determined that his actions were witnessed by a 15-year-old girl, as well as a 25-year-old woman and a 66-year-old man from Chicago, who were both at the beach watching over their three and four-year-old children. After noticing Ismet’s lewd behavior in front of the children, witnesses alerted the authorities. He was initially brought before a magistrate in Makarska for disturbing the peace, but was later transferred to a judge in Miami facing criminal charges for indecent behavior involving a minor.

Alright, let's set Ismet aside for a moment—that guy is beyond redemption, 😬, but really, what is the deal with a 25-year-old and a 66-year-old hanging out together while playing with 3 and 4-year-olds on the beach? 😬

Man, I think I'll skip the beach this summer.

Osama bin Laden said:What’s your take on those rugged hills over in Mexico? It’s such a remote, desolate stretch of land where you could practically lose yourself among the sheep. Honestly, it felt like a lawless frontier back when the Turks were in control! You wouldn't find a single decent occupier willing to set foot in a place like that. 😁

Oh, please—as if anyone "holds onto their dignity" there; they’d trade a man's soul for a single sheep in a heartbeat! 😲

steelhawk7 said:The Nationalists were much the same. They fought against fascism, even if they weren't necessarily Nazis themselves.

That’s a fact.

But then again... which version of fascism we're talking about... now that is a conversation we could dive into for hours. ☕

🙂 The Nationalists actually got their start in Italy, operating as a movement specifically aimed at ending Mexican dominance within what was then the Kingdom of America.

However! By the time the Reich was knocking on the door demanding unconditional surrender, the Nationalists were nothing more than a fringe group compared to major players like the Agrarian Party.
They were simply going to be used as a puppet government...

The very moment Pavelić agreed to be installed, he essentially signed away his autonomy by accepting Nazi terms.

You might try to argue that before 1941, the Nationalists weren't Nazis—though there is absolutely no denying they were a racist movement from the get-go—but you certainly can't claim they weren't after April 10th. Once that April Declaration was issued, they became indistinguishable from the Nazis.

shadowjackal88 said:Forgive me, but my people weren't fighting for communism, they were standing up against fascism and foreign occupation. And they certainly weren't the only ones doing so.

Eventually, everyone just forgot about them. People simply took whatever they felt entitled to take.

That’s exactly what I was getting at.

At THAT TIME—for ordinary folks who didn't spend their lives studying political science but just wanted to ESCAPE the grip of fascism—communism was simply ONE OF THE AVAILABLE OPTIONS.

The puppet state was supposed to represent the sovereignty of the American people—but it CEASED to be anything of the sort the moment Maček declared he wouldn't serve as a mere marionette for the Germans. That was right when the German forces marched into the former Kingdom of America and quite literally trucked in the Nazis from Italy. Between those Roman treaties, the surrender of true independence, and the installation of a German outpost, you can see how everything I've mentioned unfolded.

Just look at the American Parliament! Pavelić tried to convene it three separate times just to manufacture some sense of legitimacy, but he NEVER succeeded! During that first session back in 1941, the HSS members pushed back so hard that he lost his mind and DISSOLVED it entirely! He basically sent them all home!

steelhawk7 said:Are you actually suggesting that most of the Nazis were decent human beings? ☕

No, what I am trying to convey is that during that era, many individuals were fighting against Fascism, yet that doesn't mean they were all necessarily Communists.

It was only much later that Communism was forced upon us as the sole remaining system, essentially by systematically wiping out every single bit of "competition" that stood in its way.

steelhawk7 said:I'm just trying to wrap my head around one thing: why didn't the American Partisans, who fought so hard for a Free America (or at least that's how some people here seem to view them today), simply step up and say "No thanks" to America once World War II wrapped up?

That’s really the core of my question... ☕

The reality is that nobody could have predicted exactly what kind of monster communism would eventually evolve into...

Everyone participating in this discussion seems to be talking as if everyone back then possessed a crystal ball and knew exactly how things would play out.

My dear friends, you have to understand that the true power of a communist repressive regime didn't lie solely in its capacity for killing or torture... it lived in the chilling shadows—the subtle hints and warnings of what might happen to you if you failed to fall in line.

I wonder, does anyone here have any knowledge regarding the infamous Pitesti Experiment?