Iran Erupts: Crowds Burn US Flags and Swear to Ayatollah

wing2000 · Jun 29, 2025

ThatRobGuy said:
I think the "certain forms of advocacy" and "endorsement" criteria have certainly been met via his membership in the group in question.

As far as the second part, were there any former revocations proceedings filed? Or is the point of contention the the fact that he was detained for an extended period and the administration's announcing that they were going to try to start the deportation process for him under INA 237 provisions?

My issue with the poster in this thread is labeling someone a "terrorist" with no evidence.
Likewise, the US government detained him based on groundless accusations.

rjs330 · Jun 29, 2025

BCP1928 said:
Vandalism and violence are illegal. Having and voicing those opinions is not.

Just wondering when you are going to acknowledge his membership in the groups doing these things and his participation in that group. He actively participated in that group and negotiated by threats being part of that group. It wasnt just voicing an opinion. Until you acknowledge his participation in the group we have nothing further to discuss.

rjs330 · Jun 29, 2025

wing2000 said:
Likewise, the US government detained him based on groundless accusations.

That's an opinion and not material fact.

BCP1928 · Jun 29, 2025

rjs330 said:
Just wondering when you are going to acknowledge his membership in the groups doing these things and his participation in that group. He actively participated in that group and negotiated by threats being part of that group. It wasnt just voicing an opinion. Until you acknowledge his participation in the group we have nothing further to discuss.

I know, I just wanted to be sure you understand the distinction. especially about Zionism.

ralliann · Jun 29, 2025

Postvieww said:
The only evidence you would accept is one coming down on your own head. What is it with all of this liberal defense of an evil Islamic cult bent on world domination and destruction Israel and America? Help me understand the mindset of this madness.

How long would it have remained "secret" with some in congress? That was quite an element in the success of the strikes..

wing2000 · Jun 30, 2025

rjs330 said:
That's an opinion and not material fact.

If it's a "material fact", then the US government should produce the evidence.

durangodawood · Jun 30, 2025

ralliann said:
How long would it have remained "secret" with some in congress? That was quite an element in the success of the strikes..

1. Iran already anticipated the strikes and moved loads of material in advance. Of course they would.
2. Irans air defense was already completely neutralized by Israel.

I dont think secrecy mattered.

ralliann · Jun 30, 2025

durangodawood said:
1. Iran already anticipated the strikes and moved loads of material in advance. Of course they would.
2. Irans air defense was already completely neutralized by Israel.

I dont think secrecy mattered.

That was why it was a success. By the time the bombs were blasting, the planes were out of there. They said it mattered and there are some that would have leaked.

wing2000 · Jun 30, 2025

ralliann said:
That was why it was a success. By the time the bombs were blasting, the planes were out of there. They said it mattered and there are some that would have leaked.

...it was not the 8 members of Congress who broadcast war plans on an unsecured phone using the Signal app.

ralliann · Jun 30, 2025

wing2000 said:
...it was not the 8 members of Congress who broadcast war plans on an unsecured phone using the Signal app.

What has this to do with congress could not be trusted?

BCP1928 · Jun 30, 2025

ralliann said:
What has this to do with congress could not be trusted?

The pot calling the kettle black.

ralliann · Jun 30, 2025

BCP1928 said:
The pot calling the kettle black.

No. It is acknowledging the congress cannot be trusted.

wing2000 · Jun 30, 2025

ralliann said:
No. It is acknowledging the congress cannot be trusted.

Nonsense.
Neither you nor the administration has demonstrated that Congress leaked the information.
We do know the Sec of Defense shared sensitive operatioal details in an unsecure channel.

Nithavela · Jun 30, 2025

ralliann said:
No. It is acknowledging the congress cannot be trusted.

Why even maintain something you can't trust?

ralliann · Jun 30, 2025

Nithavela said:
Why even maintain something you can't trust?

Just don't announce a strike before you do it. Many presidents have done this stikes.

Nithavela · Jun 30, 2025

ralliann said:
Just don't announce a strike before you do it.

Not even in chat groups?

Iran Erupts: Crowds Burn US Flags and Swear to Ayatollah

E pluribus unum

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

christian

E pluribus unum

re Member

christian

E pluribus unum

christian

Well-Known Member

christian

E pluribus unum

you're in charge you can do it just get louis

christian

you're in charge you can do it just get louis

Similar threads