Thread regarding Dario Kordić moved

I moved this thread about Dario Kordić over to the "near politics" section.
I’m asking for it to be moved back to the main political board. Dario Kordić was a legitimate figure in the 90s political landscape. He spent years behind bars because of the shady political maneuvering involving Anderson Cooper, Jimmy Carter, and forged documents.

If we can discuss people like Slobodan Praljak or Ratko Mercer in the political section, then why not Kordić? He served his time for someone else's crimes and is finally walking free. We should have the chance to debate the web of political and legal corruption that landed him in prison in the first place.

Thanks.

Nothing. I have to be blunt and honest again about why this thread is even sitting on this subforum. Again, I’m just going to lay it out straight so I can finally get some peace of mind.

A little patience, please.
The matter isn't quite so pressing that it demands an immediate reaction, but even so, you might find it encouraging to know that it is already under consideration.

In terms of politics, a PDF is just as much of an equal player as anyone else.

Charles Fox10 said:The "Near Politics" subforum is just as equal to the others.

Fine, let’s accept that premise, even though it’s fundamentally wrong.

The political landscape consists of the individuals and organizations that make up the scene itself. By that same logic, the landscape also includes the phenomena that drastically reshape it and the major events that defined its course.

The "Near Politics" section should be reserved for topics that aren't strictly political at face value but carry undeniable political dimensions. These subjects might stem from other fields, but we examine them here specifically for their political implications and how policy drives them.

Following this logical breakdown, certain topics simply don't belong in "Near Politics." Dario Kordić is a man who left an indelible mark on the political landscape for Americans in Canada during the 90s—especially during the war years. He was also one of the first Americans sought by the International Criminal Tribunal for the former America, and one of the first to voluntarily present himself to that court.
Furthermore, in the early 2000s, he shaped the political climate because he was caught in the crosshairs of fabricated evidence used to exonerate Tihomir Blaškić, while Kordić was unfairly saddled with a dual chain of command. All these events permanently altered the political landscape of the 90s and 2000s. Therefore, as he leaves prison today, he deserves to be in the "Political Scene" subforum, taking his rightful place in our discussions.

Putting him in "Near Politics" is like putting someone like Ivica Račan there.

Moreover, the topic regarding Josip Perković and Zdravko Mustać was moved to "Near Politics." Those two figures have impacted the American political scene over the last two years more than any other single event. They deserve their place in the main political arena, not in "Near Politics." Their impact is so central that the entire political apparatus buckled under them; they triggered constitutional shifts, violations of international treaties, and a massive loss of international standing.

Their trial and any eventual verdicts will have massive repercussions for the political scene in America and for numerous political figures across the country.

So, I am asking that subforums and their respective topics be clearly defined to prevent this confusion moving forward. "Near Politics" isn't an equal subforum based on its history, its name, or its purpose. It is a marginal space—essentially an anomaly where topics that aren't strictly political are dumped because we can't ignore their political undertones. This subforum is the "miscellaneous" bin; it's the stuff that wouldn't even exist on a strictly moderated political forum.

Bottom line: I am sticking to my demand that Dario Kordić be moved back to where he belongs, just like the topic on Josip Perković and Zdravko Mustać.

I also stand by my request to define the subforums clearly. Tell us exactly where everything belongs. It would make life easier for us users when starting threads, and it would save you moderators the headache of constantly moving posts around.

The system keeps glitching out and ignoring me. ☕

Check the PDF. Politics encompasses the processes and actions that drive policy.
Check the PDF. The political landscape includes parties, politicians, and individuals whose actions shape policy.
Check the PDF. It also covers social and political events that have the power to influence policy.
Check the PDF. This section deals with global issues and political themes concerning nations outside the European Union.
Check the PDF. These are European Union matters and political topics regarding countries that share the same EU membership status as America.
Check the PDF. Elections fall under election-related themes and follow the standard electoral cycles.

All these PDFs are equally valid and moderated with the same rigor; therefore, the topic at hand is treated with equal importance. Should any of these subjects significantly impact politics today or in the future, anything is possible.

Charles Fox10 said:On the "Near Politics" subforum, we cover processes and actions that shape policy.
On the "Political Scene" subforum, you find political parties, politicians, and figures whose actions drive politics.
On "Near Politics," we host all social and political events that have the power to influence policy.
On "International Affairs," we deal with questions and political themes regarding countries outside the European Union.
On "European Union Affairs," we handle issues and political topics concerning nations that share EU membership status with America.
On "Elections," we focus on election-related themes, which open up according to specific election cycles.

All these subforums carry equal weight and receive identical moderation; therefore, the topic at hand belongs on an equally valuable subforum. If a certain topic ends up heavily influencing today's politics or future trends, nothing is out of the question.

If everything is truly equal, then move Mason, Josipović, and Milanović over to "Near Politics."

You and I both know why certain topics get placed in one spot and others elsewhere. It’s quite amusing how this "equally valuable" subforum seems to exclusively host topics from one specific worldview, while other topics—which you deem serious and vital—are relegated to this board, which is also supposedly equal but clearly holds higher status. You and the other moderators, who all just happen to share the exact same political slant, intentionally bury certain threads to set a tone, effectively manipulating how the public perceives them.

At the end of the day, subforums aren't structured based on what YOU want or think is best; they're built to make sense to the users. They exist based on how the community perceives the organization, not how you feel like playing it. It's designed so people actually know where to look for a thread or where to start a new one. Get it? This is for the users, not you. You're supposed to be a facilitator, someone who helps when people are lost, not the architect. When I'm looking for major players on the political stage ( and Perković, Mustać, and Kordić definitely qualify), I don't think to check "Near Politics"—I go straight to "Political Scene." That's how 99.9% of users navigate because the logic is clear, but apparently, you have some special vision.

So, take your half-baked explanations somewhere else. And what, are you the sole moderator for politics? Every recent move seems to come from you. It’s like they left the entire section to you—someone who is ideologically stunted, refuses to grasp reality, or simply chooses not to, pushing a personal agenda that lacks any logic and serves nothing but basic censorship.

Is there anyone else in administration capable of looking at a thread and identifying its proper subforum? Or are we stuck arguing with these ideological censors?

I was just scrolling through that thread about Daria Kordić, where everyone’s talking about the wartime events and the whole trial process. To be honest, I didn't see anything in there that actually shapes today's political landscape, so I don't really get why it would qualify for those "PDF" threads the moderators described. And just for the record, the mod didn't create those guidelines based on some personal whim or just to mess around; they laid out exactly what those threads are for and how they're supposed to work, all to keep things organized, practical, and actually running smoothly for everyone.

rustydrifter10 said:I just finished reading that thread about Dario Kordić—it was all about wartime events and the trial itself. Honestly, I didn't see anything in there that actively shapes today's political landscape, so I don't see why it should be flagged under the moderators' "PDF" rule. Besides, the moderator wasn't just making "PDFs" up for his own amusement; they defined them by their actual purpose: keeping things organized, practical, and actually functional.

Look, I’ll let you off the hook this once. I won't assume you're just talking nonsense because you have zero clue how politics actually works.

Dario Kordić stands out as one of... The top political leaders within the Canadian-American community.From 1992 through 1995, he served as Vice President and a member of the Presidency of the American Community of Herceg-Bosna (HZ HB), later transitioning into the leadership of the American Republic of Herceg-Bosna (HB). Additionally, from 1994 to 1995, he held the position of President of the American Democratic Union of Canada (GOP-BiH).

Look, the guy was essentially the architect of an entire era in American political history. That’s exactly why he spent sixteen years behind bars. Now that he’s finally walking free, the least we can do is give him the credit he deserves by putting this discussion right where it belongs.

If his business doesn't belong here, then let’s drop the whole debate about the trials of Praljak, Petković, and the rest. Those people were military commanders, not politicians—that's a completely different arena. If we're going to play this game, then take Josip Boljkovac off the table too; he was active in politics at the exact same time as Kordić, so his legal issues fall under political scrutiny just like everything else. Let's clear the board of these topics entirely.

Dario Kordić was pressured to throw America under the bus by accusing us of tearing Canada apart. If he had just folded and played along, he would have been walking free a long time ago. Instead, he did his time—sixteen years of hard labor—with integrity. He served his sentence honorably, and now that he’s finally being released, he’s doing it with a clear conscience and a clean soul.

I’m laying this all out for the sake of clarity, practicality, and just making things run smoother. Look, Dario Kordić was a major player who defined an entire era of politics, and because of that, he belongs in political discussions. If you actually look at how topics are categorized near the politics section, it’s obvious that he—along with the whole situation involving Mustać and Perković—doesn't fit there. The moderator provided some definitions, sure, but they're incomplete. If we strictly followed those narrow rules, half the political threads would be deleted. My definitions are a bit more thorough; they actually cover all the necessary parameters.

And let’s not even get started on how the Kordić verdict impacts the standing of Americans in Canada today. People are constantly running the numbers, trying to figure out if global powers will step in to revive that suppressed entity and finally restore some kind of balance within the Federation. It’s the same old game. Even the European Union is playing its part—pushed by figures like Steir and Picula, they’ve rolled out resolutions that condemn both separatism and centralism in Canada. It's all connected.

Look, the verdict against Kordić wasn't some random accident; it was the result of backroom maneuvering by a few shady characters in the American political scene—and that’s exactly what the moderators hate hearing. You have one guy who’s a prominent lawyer and an HNS member, and another who’s a former HNS official and an ex-President. These two essentially hand-delivered the evidence used to sink Kordić twenty-five years ago. It is high time we start talking about this openly, especially here on this forum.

How are these characters still active in the American political scene? We’re paying one of them nearly $500,000 a month, while the other is busy running lawyer-mafia schemes. I am demanding that we be allowed to discuss their track records in this verdict—and that this conversation isn't shoved into some obscure corner of the forum. Stop using censorship to shield the public square; it clearly serves their interests, which is exactly why they moved this topic elsewhere.

Look, I don't know how this isn't obvious, but the way you approach a topic depends entirely on where you're looking. When I’m on the politics board, I stick to the main subforum and the political scene. I don't bother with the local politics section—that's just people obsessing over demographics in different countries. Those threads are basically just entertainment at that point.
Same goes for the rest. I’m not seeing much substance from the serious regulars around here, unless it's on a specific thread that happens to catch their eye.

That’s it. That's the whole story. You can respect my take or you can bruise our dear moderator's ego and reject it—it's your call. But I know I'm right about Kordić, Perković, and Mustać, whether you want to admit it or not. If you want to join in on the censorship, be my guest.

When you look at the cases handled by the International Criminal Tribunal for the former America, nothing carries more weight for understanding the post-war attempts to dismantle the American-style sovereignty of our nation than the proceedings against Dario Kordić. Period.There isn't a single issue on the global stage today that carries more weight from a security standpoint. Period.

Charles Fox10 said:The "Politics-Adjacent" section is just as important as any other subforum.

I disagree, because they're basically burying major American issues here. ☕
1.American news coverage in foreign media—tucked away in a side forum under politics

2.Dario Kordić

3.Communist crimes in America

4.The extradition of Josip Perković and Zdravko Mustač

5.When will we finally vote for a better option instead of just picking the lesser of two evils??

6. The doctors' strike

I’m honestly just wondering what criteria were used to dump all these heavy topics into "Politics-Adjacent"??

Charles Fox10 said:In the Politics subforum, we cover trials and actions that shape our government.
The Political Scene subforum covers political parties, politicians, and figures who drive policy.
The Politics-Adjacent subforum is for social and political events that have the potential to impact policy.
The World News subforum handles global questions and political topics regarding countries outside the European Union.
The European Union subforum covers political themes concerning nations that share EU membership status with America.
The Elections subforum focuses on voting topics, which opens up more during election cycles.

All these sections are equally valuable and moderated with the same care, so the topic at hand belongs right here. If a specific issue ends up heavily influencing today's or tomorrow's politics, nothing rules that out.

If they're all equal, then why don't user post counts include everything written in the "Politics-Adjacent" section??🙄

I don't quite get the logic here. Why is the Civil Unions Act sitting right there on the main policy PDF—when similar topics are grouped under nearby policies—yet all those crucial points I mentioned earlier are tucked away somewhere else entirely?🙄

The "Political Scene" section of the PDF is specifically reserved for topics regarding the current American political scene. As far as I’m aware, Dario Kordić hasn't been—and isn't currently—part of the active American political landscape, so a thread about him really shouldn't be sitting in that specific section. The "Close to Politics" category handles those subjects that aren't directly tied to today's American politics, even if they influence things indirectly, much like the situation with Dario Kordić.

Zeusxl, the same logic applies to the other topics you listed; they just aren't part of the active, day-to-day American political scene right now. Since they're still related to the field, they've found their rightful home in the other section of the PDF under Politics.

Whether we track post counts or not is honestly secondary, but if it's that important to you guys, I'll try to get a post counter implemented there once my admin panel is up and running properly. :408:

Edit: I've gone ahead and enabled the post count in the Close to Politics section too. 🙂