The difference is the IRA's main motive was to cause Northern Ireland to get independence from Britain.
Nathan Ruth's motive appears to be because of conflicts between his religion and others.
So, highlighting the religion is relevant to the story.
I get it. Someone asking someone else to prove their performance is a "loser in denial."
https://www.reddit.com/r/FuturesTradingNQ/comments/1ik7fho/comment/mc99n3k/
The original post has "All questions will be answered," and my question is:
If the indicator is so good, why do you feel the need...
It sounds like you are saying you had a limit order but the broker filled it at a value worse than the limit value. If so, you probably have a good chance of getting the problem fixed.
If your order was a market order and you think the price quoted was incorrect, it will be a lot harder to win...
"4% of your starting balance" sounds unambiguously static to me. So, assuming his maximum drawdown was 4265.9068 (could be higher as you point out), the account would have needed a minimum starting equity greater than 4265.9068 / 0.04 == 106,647.67
Assuming this is the prop firm (not 100% sure)
https://paxmarketfunds.com/faq/
So, your "100K" account highest equity was 101,160.0163, 4% of this is 4,046.400652, and your 4,265.9068 drawdown exceeded the maximum allowed value.
See also...