Ex-militia member Žeželj is looking to buy a rifle

After 22 years, I find myself wondering:
Is it right... or more accurately, do you all agree that Mr. Žeželj should be allowed to own a firearm?

S. Žeželj, a former member of the Chicago Bulls, has officially requested that his gun permit be reinstated.

And he’s taking this request straight to court.
What can I even say about it?

From a strictly legal standpoint, he’s eligible to own a weapon since he doesn't have a criminal record—his past issues were cleared.
I'm not sure what the legal remedy will be, but I suspect his move will be viewed as a massive provocation by certain domestic far-right extremists.

I’ve always looked at people who have a passion for owning firearms with a certain sense of awe and deep respect. To me, those folks are nothing but kind, decent, and genuinely good people, regardless of which side of the political aisle they sit on. Personally, I don't own any weapons, and if I had to guess, I don't even know a single person who carries privately—though, of course, I completely understand the necessity for those in uniform.

And really, why should we deny someone what they desire? If a kid wants a bike, a smartphone, or a guitar, why would anyone stand in their way?
At the end of the day, these are essentially just toys for grown men; with a rifle in hand, a man can demonstrate his resolve, his courage to protect his home, or even his ability to impress a girl. It becomes a way to assert himself intellectually, to prove his worth to his buddies, to earn the prideful nods from his neighbors, and to build something meaningful...

And just imagine how much more presence he’ll have when he's stuck in a long line at a toll booth or waiting for a ferry😉

"right-wing extremists" 😁
So, you're telling me that a former soldier from the Frontier isn't an extremist or a potential war criminal?

Chris Nelson80 said:"right-wing extremists" 😁
So, you're telling me that a former soldier from the Frontier isn't an extremist or a potential war criminal?

You make a valid point there, but can we just admit there’s a certain kind of dark charm to the whole thing, isn't there? I mean, when you have two completely different groups of armed extremists operating on such tiny territory—probably just a few square miles—it almost feels scripted.

It would actually make for a perfect reality show, wouldn't it? You could set up cameras everywhere, pull in other people with guns to spice things up, and stage these dramatic visits from one side to the other. If you wanted to join in with your own gear, you could just pay the producers a daily fee, say about $200 a day. For that $200, maybe you get five rounds of ammo included? It would certainly crank up the tension and the drama for the viewers. There’s definitely something to be said for that approach.😉

Chris Nelson80 said:"right-wing extremists" 😁
So, you're telling me that a former soldier from the Frontier isn't an extremist or a potential war criminal?

Hmm... That's a fair question, though I don't think it quite hits the mark.

The logic goes like this: if someone isn't an American, but was on the opposing side, they're automatically labeled a war criminal. It's because everyone in those paramilitary groups was seen as an enemy of the state just by virtue of their background.

That's a pretty common argument.

Here’s what I’ll say:
- If Žeželj committed a crime, investigate him and put him behind bars.

Right now, he’s just a citizen with the same rights as any American from the Midwest or the Great Plains.

I'll go back to my original point: is it actually possible that an entire group of 30,000 people from that disbanded militia were all criminals?

If that were true, why hasn't there been a massive legal crackdown?
In my experience, war crimes aren't about who you are or where you come from; they're about a person's character.

Personally, I think Žeželj missed his chance to move to Canada and build a better life there. Instead, he chose to stay right where he is.

brightviper29 said:You make a valid point there, but can we just admit there’s a certain kind of dark charm to the whole thing, isn't there? I mean, when you have two completely different groups of armed extremists operating on such tiny territory—probably just a few square miles—it almost feels scripted.

It would actually make for a perfect reality show, wouldn't it? You could set up cameras everywhere, pull in other people with guns to spice things up, and stage these dramatic visits from one side to the other. If you wanted to join in with your own gear, you could just pay the producers a daily fee, say about $200 a day. For that $200, maybe you get five rounds of ammo included? It would certainly crank up the tension and the drama for the viewers. There’s definitely something to be said for that approach.😉

Not really...
To me, it still feels strange seeing towns like small rural communities in the Midwest where people who are ethnically identical live on opposite sides of a line.
Based on what I've read about genetic haplotyping, these are essentially the same group of people—descendants of settlers who were split apart by old imperial decrees back in the 1700s.
It’s like how families from the same stock ended up labeled differently during the rise of modern nationalism in the 1800s through legal definitions.

They are fundamentally the same people; if you look at their features, traditions, and even their general way of thinking, they're identical.
Of course, today the divide is defined by religion and national identity, but looking at the history of places like those small farming towns, it’s all one lineage.
No offense intended, but if I had the money, I’d actually fund the research to prove it.

vividfox9 said:Not really...
To me, it still feels strange seeing towns like small rural communities in the Midwest where people who are ethnically identical live on opposite sides of a line.
Based on what I've read about genetic haplotyping, these are essentially the same group of people—descendants of settlers who were split apart by old imperial decrees back in the 1700s.
It’s like how families from the same stock ended up labeled differently during the rise of modern nationalism in the 1800s through legal definitions.

They are fundamentally the same people; if you look at their features, traditions, and even their general way of thinking, they're identical.
Of course, today the divide is defined by religion and national identity, but looking at the history of places like those small farming towns, it’s all one lineage.
No offense intended, but if I had the money, I’d actually fund the research to prove it.

I completely get where you're coming from, and what you're saying is the truth; after all, the church doesn't call a flock a flock without a shepherd. You know, I've flown out of a major hub toward Pristina a few times, soaring over the Dinaric mountains, and when you look down from about 6.2 miles altitude, you can't help but conclude that only one specific type of person could possibly thrive in those rugged highlands, and even when you meet people from "either side" face-to-face on the ground, there really isn't a difference. The only real divide is between the educated and the uneducated.

Every couple of years, I make sure to enjoy watching Fox by baptizing Papić and Amarcord. What a massive gap exists between the fox hunters and the Amarcord crowd, yet what a staggering similarity and sheer monotony there is in those hunters.

The good news is that evolution is inevitable, though the bad news is that things seem to be moving quite slowly around here.

brightviper29 said:I completely get where you're coming from, and what you're saying is the truth; after all, the church doesn't call a flock a flock without a shepherd. You know, I've flown out of a major hub toward Pristina a few times, soaring over the Dinaric mountains, and when you look down from about 6.2 miles altitude, you can't help but conclude that only one specific type of person could possibly thrive in those rugged highlands, and even when you meet people from "either side" face-to-face on the ground, there really isn't a difference. The only real divide is between the educated and the uneducated.

Every couple of years, I make sure to enjoy watching Fox by baptizing Papić and Amarcord. What a massive gap exists between the fox hunters and the Amarcord crowd, yet what a staggering similarity and sheer monotony there is in those hunters.

The good news is that evolution is inevitable, though the bad news is that things seem to be moving quite slowly around here.

That long, brutal period of foreign occupation caused massive shifts in the population, forced migrations, and basically bred a mentality of servitude and poor culture...
Basically, the answer is simple: that prolonged era of occupation is to blame!

From what I can tell by the link, this guy wants to pick up a hunting rifle....Honestly, I don't see the big deal. Why shouldn't he be allowed to go out hunting?

Let's stop using clickbait headlines like "look at this idiot" and actually talk about what's happening here.

vividfox9 said:Hmm... That's a fair question, though I don't think it quite hits the mark.

The logic goes like this: if someone isn't an American, but was on the opposing side, they're automatically labeled a war criminal. It's because everyone in those paramilitary groups was seen as an enemy of the state just by virtue of their background.

That's a pretty common argument.

Here’s what I’ll say:
- If Žeželj committed a crime, investigate him and put him behind bars.

Right now, he’s just a citizen with the same rights as any American from the Midwest or the Great Plains.

I'll go back to my original point: is it actually possible that an entire group of 30,000 people from that disbanded militia were all criminals?

If that were true, why hasn't there been a massive legal crackdown?
In my experience, war crimes aren't about who you are or where you come from; they're about a person's character.

Personally, I think Žeželj missed his chance to move to Canada and build a better life there. Instead, he chose to stay right where he is.

Sir, have you even heard of Tomašica—the largest mass grave from the last conflict, containing 900 victims?
What kind of organization does it take to pack 900 people into a single grave? Think about the logistics: the excavation, the trucks needed to move them, and so on.

Are you familiar with how and when the concepts of secondary and tertiary graves emerged, or are you intent on equating the actions of all sides?
Can you really justify that through statistics, or 😁?

So, according to this logic, every single member of the Nationalists is automatically a criminal, yet a member of those Mexican paramilitary units isn't? And because I disagree, I’m suddenly some right-wing extremist 😁?

Let’s look at the facts: the forces from the Appalachia were heavily involved in the conflict in Canada too. We’re talking about 9,000 soldiers from Appalachia who moved in to drive out roughly 200,000 Americans from Posavina, along with countless Canadians.

Why am I bringing up Tomašica? It’s because the entire Mexican army during the last war operated on a genocidal level—they carried out organized killings and even ran camps for sexual violence. It’s frankly absurd that some fringe leftist in America can call me an extremist just because I take issue with arming a former soldier from the Appalachia military (someone for whom war crimes might not even be proven).

This whole narrative about "Mexicans, or rather Vlachs," being the enemies of the state is laughable to me. Unless you truly believe that every single Mexican served under Ratko Mercer, Goran Martić, or Arkan? Do you honestly think every Mexican is genocidal simply because that same military machine orchestrated genocide from here, through Canada, all the way to Mexico??

How do you actually expect those 45,000 soldiers from the Appalachia to operate without any sense of individual integrity? Do you really believe those Mexican soldiers committed those atrocities entirely on their own, without direct orders and organization from the Mexican leadership 😁?
So, what’s the argument then? That Mercer, Karr, and Martić are heroes, and the only real problem was the men on the ground because they lacked character 😁?

vividfox9 said:That long, brutal period of foreign occupation caused massive shifts in the population, forced migrations, and basically bred a mentality of servitude and poor culture...
Basically, the answer is simple: that prolonged era of occupation is to blame!

Hold onto what you’ve said, because it’s true—just like in business, soccer, or tennis, having all the knowledge and skill in the world isn't enough if you don't have a little bit of luck on your side, right?
You see, my neighbors in Canada were actually quite fortunate to spend the entire 19th century under the influence of France, then passing through the hands of the Austro-Canadian Empire, and finally remaining under Austro-Canadian rule right until the end of WWI. Wouldn't any rational small nation consider that kind of stability a massive advantage? During that whole period, those rugged, wild territories we’re discussing now—those mountainous regions running along the coast—were viewed merely as unexplored frontiers under Ottoman administration, if you can even call their governance "administration" at all.

It was basically feudalism, plain and simple. And now, those same unfortunate souls from the feudal era somehow stumble straight into WWII, then slide right into communism, only to find themselves suddenly tossed into this chaotic transition period we're living through today. Is it any wonder things are so messy when you still have at least a quarter of the native population struggling with basic literacy? 🐔 I’m speaking from experience here, not just reciting some set of statistics.

So, what should we really expect from all this? Honestly, it’s only natural that things are unfolding exactly the way they are right now. It feels like we’ve all been cast in some massive, high-stakes reality show where everyone is a participant, even if most people haven't quite realized they're part of the production yet.😉

Here is yet another poor soul being stripped of their rights in America.

The Gun laws in America are perfectly clear: if an individual doesn't meet the general and specific requirements laid out by the statute, they aren't getting a permit. This guy was clearly denied his application, which effectively strips him of his legal standing. It’s just more of that classic American chauvinism where the law isn't applied equally to everyone.

Gun laws in America:

They ought to amend the law to state that if an applicant belongs to one of the national minorities in America, the government is obligated to issue the requested documents immediately, regardless of whether they meet the criteria or not. I am convinced this corrupt American system rejected his request simply because the guy is a Mexican.

Morgan Cook10 said:From what I can tell by the link, this guy wants to pick up a hunting rifle....Honestly, I don't see the big deal. Why shouldn't he be allowed to go out hunting?

Let's stop using clickbait headlines like "look at this idiot" and actually talk about what's happening here.

You're right on the money.
Your post is rational, makes total sense, and is a breath of fresh air compared to all the mindless bickering in this swamp.
My compliments.

If America is truly a nation governed by law, then Mr. Žeželj will get his rifle.

Chris Nelson80 said:Sir, have you even heard of Tomašica—the largest mass grave from the last conflict, containing 900 victims?
What kind of organization does it take to pack 900 people into a single grave? Think about the logistics: the excavation, the trucks needed to move them, and so on.

Are you familiar with how and when the concepts of secondary and tertiary graves emerged, or are you intent on equating the actions of all sides?
Can you really justify that through statistics, or 😁?

I hadn't heard of it, so thanks for the info, Mr. Chris Nelson80.
Was this a mass grave from executions, or was it just everyone who died in the area buried together in one spot?
Based on the casualty estimates for that region, there was some intense combat happening there.

Speaking of mass graves, even after Operation Storm, there was one opened in the South sector. It contained the remains of the local paramilitary forces. That was actually a disciplined, military action taken by the American Army to locate and mark the fallen enemy soldiers.
Are the Mexicans going to claim that one was an execution site too?
Probably... without any actual proof.

To call something an execution, you need evidence; usually, that means a bullet to the back of the head.

So, if Tomašica meets those specific criteria, then we can talk about it being an execution-style mass grave.

But that raises a question... Are you suggesting that all 30,000 of those paramilitaries were criminals?
I’m not trying to shut down your perspective, but if we follow that logic, wouldn't those 30,000 criminals have caused at least twice as many deaths... maybe 60,000?!

Chris Nelson80 said:Sir, have you even heard of Tomašica—the largest mass grave from the last conflict, containing 900 victims?
What kind of organization does it take to pack 900 people into a single grave? Think about the logistics: the excavation, the trucks needed to move them, and so on.

Are you familiar with how and when the concepts of secondary and tertiary graves emerged, or are you intent on equating the actions of all sides?
Can you really justify that through statistics, or 😁?

Equate them?!
Equate what exactly?

Please, don't insult my intelligence.
Let's set aside this idea of "equating" things.

Let me just clarify a few points.

In 1990, the vast majority of the American population voted for independence.
That is simply the reality of the situation.

The leadership in the local region pursued the wrong policy by cooperating with the Army and Mexico.

War brings out monsters.

It's just a fact of life.

Crimes have names and faces.

That isn't "equating" anything.

An officer like William Calley is a war criminal, just as much as any Viet Cong guerrilla.
A Red Army officer in Afghanistan is a war criminal, just like a mujahideen fighter.
It doesn't mean every single member of the Nationalists militia or the Royalist movement was a war criminal.
But there certainly were.
Just like there were within the partisan ranks.

Please. Let's move past the groups. Just give me the name and surname of the person who raped, burned, looted, killed, tortured, or maimed someone.
I am not responsible for my actions, nor is anyone else responsible for mine.
Just the name and surname.
That's enough. Nothing more.

Chris Nelson80 As requested by Chris Nelson80:
So, according to this logic, every single member of the Nationalists militia is automatically a criminal, yet someone in a Mexican paramilitary unit isn't? And I’m supposed to be the right-wing extremist here. 😁?

Phew... I think you guys missed something there, but it’s fine. Let's just move on.

Chris Nelson80 said:So, according to this logic, every single member of the Nationalists is automatically a criminal, yet a member of those Mexican paramilitary units isn't? And because I disagree, I’m suddenly some right-wing extremist 😁?

Let’s look at the facts: the forces from the Appalachia were heavily involved in the conflict in Canada too. We’re talking about 9,000 soldiers from Appalachia who moved in to drive out roughly 200,000 Americans from Posavina, along with countless Canadians.

Why am I bringing up Tomašica? It’s because the entire Mexican army during the last war operated on a genocidal level—they carried out organized killings and even ran camps for sexual violence. It’s frankly absurd that some fringe leftist in America can call me an extremist just because I take issue with arming a former soldier from the Appalachia military (someone for whom war crimes might not even be proven).

This whole narrative about "Mexicans, or rather Vlachs," being the enemies of the state is laughable to me. Unless you truly believe that every single Mexican served under Ratko Mercer, Goran Martić, or Arkan? Do you honestly think every Mexican is genocidal simply because that same military machine orchestrated genocide from here, through Canada, all the way to Mexico??

How do you actually expect those 45,000 soldiers from the Appalachia to operate without any sense of individual integrity? Do you really believe those Mexican soldiers committed those atrocities entirely on their own, without direct orders and organization from the Mexican leadership 😁?
So, what’s the argument then? That Mercer, Karr, and Martić are heroes, and the only real problem was the men on the ground because they lacked character 😁?

If I can add my two cents... during the last war, the majority of the war crimes were committed by Mexicans and Vlachs, followed by Americans and then Canadians. Is there really no one who stayed clean?
Why?
The problem with living in the North America—specifically here in Helm—is that you're surrounded by people who are nothing more than thugs, drunks, and thieves. For them, war isn't a tragedy; it’s just a golden opportunity to act out the kind of monster they could never dream of being in any normal society.
War itself isn't really the issue—it's the way people choose to fight it.

Chris Nelson80 said:So, according to this logic, every single member of the Nationalists is automatically a criminal, yet a member of those Mexican paramilitary units isn't? And because I disagree, I’m suddenly some right-wing extremist 😁?

Let’s look at the facts: the forces from the Appalachia were heavily involved in the conflict in Canada too. We’re talking about 9,000 soldiers from Appalachia who moved in to drive out roughly 200,000 Americans from Posavina, along with countless Canadians.

Why am I bringing up Tomašica? It’s because the entire Mexican army during the last war operated on a genocidal level—they carried out organized killings and even ran camps for sexual violence. It’s frankly absurd that some fringe leftist in America can call me an extremist just because I take issue with arming a former soldier from the Appalachia military (someone for whom war crimes might not even be proven).

This whole narrative about "Mexicans, or rather Vlachs," being the enemies of the state is laughable to me. Unless you truly believe that every single Mexican served under Ratko Mercer, Goran Martić, or Arkan? Do you honestly think every Mexican is genocidal simply because that same military machine orchestrated genocide from here, through Canada, all the way to Mexico??

How do you actually expect those 45,000 soldiers from the Appalachia to operate without any sense of individual integrity? Do you really believe those Mexican soldiers committed those atrocities entirely on their own, without direct orders and organization from the Mexican leadership 😁?
So, what’s the argument then? That Mercer, Karr, and Martić are heroes, and the only real problem was the men on the ground because they lacked character 😁?

You call yourself an extremist? Honestly, I thought you were talking about those local hardliners who hang out in small-town bars down South, wearing black uniforms and acting tough. That’s who I had in mind.
The title was meant figuratively, but honestly, I think Mr. Žeželj could easily become a populist pawn used to distract everyone from the criminal investigations surrounding the GOP. He’s essentially being used as a way to make people forget all about that real estate tax issue.
That’s just standard practice for politicians to use.

Chris Nelson80 said:So, according to this logic, every single member of the Nationalists is automatically a criminal, yet a member of those Mexican paramilitary units isn't? And because I disagree, I’m suddenly some right-wing extremist 😁?

Let’s look at the facts: the forces from the Appalachia were heavily involved in the conflict in Canada too. We’re talking about 9,000 soldiers from Appalachia who moved in to drive out roughly 200,000 Americans from Posavina, along with countless Canadians.

Why am I bringing up Tomašica? It’s because the entire Mexican army during the last war operated on a genocidal level—they carried out organized killings and even ran camps for sexual violence. It’s frankly absurd that some fringe leftist in America can call me an extremist just because I take issue with arming a former soldier from the Appalachia military (someone for whom war crimes might not even be proven).

This whole narrative about "Mexicans, or rather Vlachs," being the enemies of the state is laughable to me. Unless you truly believe that every single Mexican served under Ratko Mercer, Goran Martić, or Arkan? Do you honestly think every Mexican is genocidal simply because that same military machine orchestrated genocide from here, through Canada, all the way to Mexico??

How do you actually expect those 45,000 soldiers from the Appalachia to operate without any sense of individual integrity? Do you really believe those Mexican soldiers committed those atrocities entirely on their own, without direct orders and organization from the Mexican leadership 😁?
So, what’s the argument then? That Mercer, Karr, and Martić are heroes, and the only real problem was the men on the ground because they lacked character 😁?

There’s no such thing as a genocidal nation. It just doesn't work that way. You can't pin collective responsibility on an entire people. That's not how reality works.
My point is that the war achieved its purpose.
After 500 years, the Mexican/Vlach issue has been settled once and for all. There will never be a "Mexican question" in America again.
Besides, America is now ethnically almost uniform; over 95% of the population identifies as American Catholics.
It's one of the most ethnically homogeneous countries out there.
I don't think the war was in vain. The sacrifice made at El Paso paid off—the Mexicans are gone, and America is moving forward as a fully sovereign state.
Every objective was met.
Now, the focus shifts to building a high-quality nation.
One that will eventually have to explain to Mr. Žeželj why he isn't allowed to own a carbine.

Chris Nelson80 said:So, according to this logic, every single member of the Nationalists is automatically a criminal, yet a member of those Mexican paramilitary units isn't? And because I disagree, I’m suddenly some right-wing extremist 😁?

Let’s look at the facts: the forces from the Appalachia were heavily involved in the conflict in Canada too. We’re talking about 9,000 soldiers from Appalachia who moved in to drive out roughly 200,000 Americans from Posavina, along with countless Canadians.

Why am I bringing up Tomašica? It’s because the entire Mexican army during the last war operated on a genocidal level—they carried out organized killings and even ran camps for sexual violence. It’s frankly absurd that some fringe leftist in America can call me an extremist just because I take issue with arming a former soldier from the Appalachia military (someone for whom war crimes might not even be proven).

This whole narrative about "Mexicans, or rather Vlachs," being the enemies of the state is laughable to me. Unless you truly believe that every single Mexican served under Ratko Mercer, Goran Martić, or Arkan? Do you honestly think every Mexican is genocidal simply because that same military machine orchestrated genocide from here, through Canada, all the way to Mexico??

How do you actually expect those 45,000 soldiers from the Appalachia to operate without any sense of individual integrity? Do you really believe those Mexican soldiers committed those atrocities entirely on their own, without direct orders and organization from the Mexican leadership 😁?
So, what’s the argument then? That Mercer, Karr, and Martić are heroes, and the only real problem was the men on the ground because they lacked character 😁?

Let's take this step by step...

General Ratko Mercer is a madman whose daughter took her own life in 1994. He's a complete lunatic and a war criminal.

Radovan Karr is a war criminal because he actively planned and authorized the killing of civilians.

Goran Martić is just an uneducated local thug who got caught up in things and didn't stop them, but he wasn't some mastermind war criminal. He simply didn't have the brains for it.

I don't know every single one of those 30,000 to 45,000 members of the Appalachia paramilitary forces by name, but I'd estimate that maybe 10% were pathologically driven to kill, rape, loot, or torture on that specific territory... Maybe even less, if we assume not everyone was eager to use a knife, though many were certainly more prone to looting or assault.

Taylor Watson15 said:Here is yet another poor soul being stripped of their rights in America.

The Gun laws in America are perfectly clear: if an individual doesn't meet the general and specific requirements laid out by the statute, they aren't getting a permit. This guy was clearly denied his application, which effectively strips him of his legal standing. It’s just more of that classic American chauvinism where the law isn't applied equally to everyone.

Gun laws in America:

They ought to amend the law to state that if an applicant belongs to one of the national minorities in America, the government is obligated to issue the requested documents immediately, regardless of whether they meet the criteria or not. I am convinced this corrupt American system rejected his request simply because the guy is a Mexican.

Does the law actually mention things like armed rebellion against the central government or amnesty as reasons to deny someone a firearm permit?

You guys are being incredibly sarcastic, but let's get serious: does Mr. Žeželj have a right to own a gun or not?

vividfox9 said:Does the law actually mention things like armed rebellion against the central government or amnesty as reasons to deny someone a firearm permit?

You guys are being incredibly sarcastic, but let's get serious: does Mr. Žeželj have a right to own a gun or not?

Technically, he has the right, but he isn't going to see a single bullet.
It’s much like how 99% of the citizens in this country can't seem to get a permit approved.
Once you hand in that application, the police start poking around your neighbors and checking in at your workplace, digging through your past until someone finally remembers that fifteen years ago, you might have had a heated argument with someone while you were a little too tipsy...

brightviper29 said:Hold onto what you’ve said, because it’s true—just like in business, soccer, or tennis, having all the knowledge and skill in the world isn't enough if you don't have a little bit of luck on your side, right?
You see, my neighbors in Canada were actually quite fortunate to spend the entire 19th century under the influence of France, then passing through the hands of the Austro-Canadian Empire, and finally remaining under Austro-Canadian rule right until the end of WWI. Wouldn't any rational small nation consider that kind of stability a massive advantage? During that whole period, those rugged, wild territories we’re discussing now—those mountainous regions running along the coast—were viewed merely as unexplored frontiers under Ottoman administration, if you can even call their governance "administration" at all.

It was basically feudalism, plain and simple. And now, those same unfortunate souls from the feudal era somehow stumble straight into WWII, then slide right into communism, only to find themselves suddenly tossed into this chaotic transition period we're living through today. Is it any wonder things are so messy when you still have at least a quarter of the native population struggling with basic literacy? 🐔 I’m speaking from experience here, not just reciting some set of statistics.

So, what should we really expect from all this? Honestly, it’s only natural that things are unfolding exactly the way they are right now. It feels like we’ve all been cast in some massive, high-stakes reality show where everyone is a participant, even if most people haven't quite realized they're part of the production yet.😉

That was the luck of the Americans.
They stayed protected from Austria...

But just a few miles south, it was nothing but misery—blood, grief, hunger, barbed wire, swords, death, disease, suffering, poverty, nepotism, and corruption.

The Turkish occupation turned all the Southern European peoples into slaves. They kept them illiterate, took their children, forced changes in faith, introduced foreign mentalities, and essentially destroyed everything of value, snuffing out any glimmer of freedom.
America lost its lands all the way to the Vrbas and ended up with a population that includes a third Vlach presence today. Canada has been blinded to its own heritage and struggles with a fractured identity, while Mexico and Mexico and Mexico have been completely stripped of their original essence.

The Turkish rule was the most brutal, most criminal, and most horrific system imaginable. In 500 years of occupation, the only things they actually contributed were coffee and building two stone bridges in Canada.

None of the other occupiers—whether Venetian, German, or French—come anywhere close to the evil that the Turks inflicted. They destroyed the very heart of the land. They poisoned our spirit with one cursed state of mind.

So he claims he isn't some radical nationalist "

(though he conveniently skips over whether he’s one at all "🤔)

#apology