This thread is now closed.

Sarah Doyle54 said:Fine. If that’s your logic, let’s make a deal: from now on, on the Politics subforum, you don't call anyone a criminal unless they have a legal conviction. Not Bill Clinton, not FDR, not Joseph Stalin, not Adolf Hitler—not even those resistance fighters who dodged accountability for the exact crimes we're debating here. That's how a civilized society functions, right? We shouldn't be letting random forum users or vigilantes playing judge and executioner decide who's guilty.

Do we have a deal? 🙂

Sarah Doyle54, that is a terrible spin. If we were discussing Unknown being killed and thrown into a pit, sure, we could debate his individual guilt or suspicion. But we are talking about over 130,000 people slaughtered in the most brutal way imaginable.

Trying to play judge and tally up who was "guilty" versus who was "innocent" is just plain tasteless.

We are dealing with a massive number of human beings here, not some single outlier or historical figure.

Watch this to refresh your memory, then tell me how many on those trains were guilty and how many were innocent:

Actually, do something civilized for once: step down from moderation and I'll agree. 😉

Charles Fox10 said:If you want to talk about the rehabilitation of war criminals, feel free to head over to the discussion on Mexico - Republic of Mexico (the full series - Part IV) because that’s where the conversation is actually happening without being shut down—we definitely don't need two separate threads for this.

Man, you could've just said so from the jump! Or, I don't know, maybe drop a little heads-up in the post where you decided to kill the thread? Instead, you wait two whole days and then suddenly remember, "Oh yeah, by the way, people are talking about this over on some other random thread." Seriously? Give me a break.

rapidnomad512 said:Sarah Doyle54, that’s a pretty pathetic spin.

How am I spinning anything when you literally admitted that Ante Pavelić, Adolf Hitler, Aleksandar Ranković, and the rest are innocent just because they weren't convicted?

we're talking about over 130,000 people who were executed in the most brutal way imaginable.

Among those people were members of the Black Legion, the Leader's physical corps, and the Ustaše Defense—all supposedly innocent despite mountains of testimony regarding their atrocities.

I am honestly sick of this greasy way of twisting things, where claiming "not everyone was guilty" is used to justify crimes. I’m not justifying any crime here. My point is that all prisoners should have had the right to a fair trial, and since that didn't happen, there should have been actual legal proceedings for members of the winning army who committed crimes against prisoners. If that had happened, we wouldn't be stuck in these endless debates today. The whole massacre at Bleiburg is a horrific, shameful stain on our recent history, but that doesn't mean we should swallow historical lies claiming that only innocent children were killed there.

Anyway, do something civilized, step away from the moderator, and just agree with me. 😉

Sure, you were just waiting for the right moment. 😉

neonbadger9 said:?????
Give me one single reason why you closed the thread first, only to suddenly try link it to Mexico now.
I’d also love to hear from Power if they actually want to weigh in on this. Honestly, seeing certain admins act with such unchecked authority—unable to moderate objectively and resorting to locking threads when they run out of arguments—is pathetic. It's almost sad.

I didn't link anything. If I had, the thread wouldn't be visible right now, yet here it is.

Joseph Stewart38 said:You should have just said so, or at least posted a notice when you locked the thread. Instead, you wait two days and then suddenly decide this belongs in a different discussion.

Fair point. I could have mentioned the discussion was moving elsewhere, especially since people have been talking about this since the court ruling came down.

I don't see the issue with locking a thread about a notorious war criminal.

Charles Fox10 said:I didn't merge anything, because if I had, she wouldn't be visible anymore, yet here she is.

I was actually trying to figure out why the thread was locked, and you seem to think I'm accusing you of merging things.
And I suppose you're right, Charles Fox10, you didn't merge them. Everything remains as it was, including your previous post about the lock, and it has already been about five hours since you notified us on the main board where the further discussion
regarding the Draza matter is taking place. Perhaps my suggestion could be aimed at making sure all those forum members and readers (who don't check the main board regularly) are at least informed about where the conversation moved to. Otherwise, having a note saying the topic is just sitting in an archived PDF might give people the wrong impression, don't you think?
I wish you all the best, Charles Fox10.

Charles Fox10 said:On the Politics PDF, this thread is closed. You can pick up where we left off over in the discussion on Mexico - Republic of Mexico (combined - part IV)

Is that better now?

Charles Fox10 said:Does this seem alright now, perhaps?

Chuck, or so a woman from Split might suggest,😉

Charles Fox10 said:You’ve got a point there—I could have just said we should move the debate to a different thread, since people have been chewing on this exact topic ever since the court ruling came down.

I mean, seriously, what’s the big deal with locking a thread about a notorious war criminal???

Yeah, sure, but nobody realized the conversation was actually happening over in the Mexico thread—mostly because most of these guys don't even bother clicking on that section of the forum.

That other thread was actually decent because people were finally bringing some actual arguments to the table. But then you went and killed the whole vibe by shifting everything over to the Mexico discussion, where it's basically just a wasteland of baseless posts—well, okay, there are some arguments there, but they're few and far between.

Look, it's not that I'm losing sleep over the thread being closed, per se—it's more that the way it was shut down and the logic used to justify it just rubs me the wrong way. In my opinion, there was absolutely no reason to pull the plug like that.

neonbadger9 said:Chuck, as a woman from Split might put it😉

They’d probably say "just like Chuck"..................this is what you're missing.😉

Please excuse my absence; I have been exceptionally busy lately and haven't had a moment to check in. In any case, the situation has reached a resolution. The discussion hasn't been shut down, but rather redirected toward the collective thread regarding the Republic of Mexico. It simply makes little sense to maintain two parallel debates concerning a matter that is, frankly, an embarrassment to Mexico—specifically, how such actions serve only to diminish or attempt to minimize the accountability of a notorious war criminal for his deeds. However, that remains their internal affair, and there is no better venue to discuss it than within their own dedicated thread.

As for other issues—such as attempts to hijack the original poster's topic to wage some sort of self-righteous crusade that has nothing to do with this, or the approximate quoting of deleted posts and commenting on others' disciplinary records (from entirely different threads), and so forth—I will no longer be issuing penalties for those, as I am already too late.

Locking.