The left accuses the right of being Russian sympathizers the left proves they're terrorist sympathizers in house vote.

These fucking democraps in the house can't even support people fighting against the terrorist regime IN THEIR OWN COUNTRY!!

The TDS on the left is out of control. This is indefensible and despicable yous on the left should be ashamed of yourselves and your party ASSUP are you an Iranian agent also??


Democrats Block House Resolution In Support of the Iranian Protestors

Posted at 8:00 pm on January 14, 2020 by Bonchie

Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., right, consoles and Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., as Tlaib talked about Israel’s refusal to allow them to visit the country during a news conference Monday, Aug. 19, 2019 at the State Capitol in St. Paul, Minn. (AP Photo/Jim Mone)

But it’s totally off limits to joke that Democrats are sympathetic to the Iranian regime you guys. Don’t you dare post any memes with Pelosi or Schumer insinuating such.
With thousands risking their lives in Iran to push back on the oppressive Islamist government that rules over them, you’d think the one thing Republicans and Democrats could agree on is supporting them in our rhetoric. No one is even talking about going to war, arming them, or doing anything other that saying “this is right, and this is wrong.”

But nope, Democrats blocked a resolution today that would have shown U.S. support for the protestors.

Alex Parker
Worse, Democrats blocked even allowing a vote on the measure because they are too cowardly to actually go on record on the issue.
And just in case someone might think McCarthy had put some partisan poison pills in the resolution that made it impossible for Democrats to support, that’s another nope.

Consideration and a vote on House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy’s resolution was blocked because Democrats advanced the previous question, by a vote of 226-191. The resolution would have condemned the Government of Iran for killing 1,500 Iranian citizens who were protesting their government, as well as condemned the Government of Iran for shooting down Ukraine International Airlines Flight 752, killing 176 people.
In addition, the resolution; “(3) condemns the Government of Iran for repeatedly lying to its people and to the world about its responsibility for the downing of Ukraine International Airlines Flight 752; (4) calls on the Government of Iran to— (A) refrain from the use of violence; and (B) protect the rights of freedom of expression and peaceful assembly; and (5) supports the protestors in Iran, their demands for accountability, and their desire for the Government of Iran to respect freedom and human rights.”

There was simply no excuse for Democrats not to allow a vote on McCarthy’s resolution unless they simply felt it was too harsh, which would pointedly show them to be sympathizing with the Mullahs. Enough obfuscating about the realities. Pelosi was just calling Mitch McConnell a Russian agent yesterday, so she’s owed no deference for her own actions.
I’m sure Democrats will try to save face with a watered down resolution of their own, but this was just despicable on their part. People are dying as we speak. This isn’t a time to delay a vote in order to play politics, but that’s exactly what they’ve decided to do. It shows exactly where their priorities lie.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics...lation/604852/

Whatever Iran’s intention, the attack did indeed leave an American dead. Which prompted the Trump administration to kill dozens of militia members in retaliatory strikes. Which led to supporters of that militia storming the U.S. embassy in Baghdad. Which resulted in Trump ordering the targeted killing of the Iranian general Qassem Soleimani in Iraq. Which moved Iran to fire missiles at Iraqi military bases hosting U.S. forces. Which caused the Iranians to brace for blowback from the United States, creating the conditions in which an Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps missile operator apparently mistook Flight 752 for an American cruise missile and, with 10 seconds to act and his communication channels malfunctioning, blasted it out of the sky above Tehran.

There wouldn't be any protest

without the Wag the Dog situation.

Thanks for weighting in as a terrorist sympathizing Iranian agent.

Stop being stupid and pay attention to what's really going on. Nobody sympathizes with terrorists. Even Mr. "Clock & Calendar" had to walk back his remarks.

IF YOU FOCUS ON THE PAGE HE'S "READING", THE TEXT IS WRITTEN IN STANDARD LETTER FORM. IT'S NOT AS IF HIS DUMBASS CAN READ CHINESE FROM TOP TO BOTTOM. WHERE THE FUCK IS THE EVIDENCE OF THE EMINENT THREAT?!

How To Avoid Swallowing War Propaganda

https://www.currentaffairs.org/2020/...war-propaganda

Originally Posted by eccieuser9500

Okay... Now I understand the demoncRATS problem. More dismantling of the Obama legacy...

https://neonnettle.com/news/9892-oba...-PpYENv4uLg0M8

Trump is encouraging the same moderates that Obama encouraged by opening up their country to more trade....



Hmmmmm

Fascist DPST's are in bed with the Iranian Ayatollahs.

Typical Anti-Semite racist Omar, Tlaib, and the rest of the fascist DPST's.

They already have plans for ovens for Americans.

^^^ Yupper

Fascist DPST's are in bed with the Iranian Ayatollahs.

Typical Anti-Semite racist Omar, Tlaib, and the rest of the fascist DPST's.

They already have plans for ovens for Americans. Originally Posted by oeb11

ovens for Americans?

Dude you’ve posted some outlandish claims but that one is #1 on my list..good grief! get a grip!

bad optics for democrats in voting down support

Stop being stupid and pay attention to what's really going on. Nobody sympathizes with terrorists. Even Mr. "Clock & Calendar" had to walk back his remarks.

IF YOU FOCUS ON THE PAGE HE'S "READING", THE TEXT IS WRITTEN IN STANDARD LETTER FORM. IT'S NOT AS IF HIS DUMBASS CAN READ CHINESE FROM TOP TO BOTTOM. WHERE THE FUCK IS THE EVIDENCE OF THE EMINENT THREAT?! Originally Posted by eccieuser9500

Can you please show me that part of the Constitution that says a President can not kill someone who has demonstrated by word or deed to be an enemy combatant because Obama would be surprised to learn this after killing Bin Laden who was not an eminent threat or Anwar al Awalki, an American citizen that Obama killed with a drone without due process accorded to every citizen.

Al

-

Awlaki

became the first U.S.

citizen

to be targeted and killed by

a U.S.

drone strike without the rights of due process being afforded. President Barack Obama ordered the strike. His son, Abdulrahman

al

-

Awlaki

(a 16-year-old U.S.

citizen

), was killed in

a U.S.

drone strike two weeks later.

Please don't use illogical reasoning just because you dislike someone. It makes it to easy to prove you wrong unless of course you simply don't care about being proven wrong. Do you?

Trump is encouraging the same moderates that Obama encouraged by opening up their country to more trade....



Hmmmmm Originally Posted by WTF

Are you an Iranian agent ASSUP??

If it opposes Trump - the fascist DPST love 'em!!
ftw - better hope you are not Jewish - the DPST's are taking names for their camps!

Can you please show me that part of the Constitution that says a President can not kill someone who has demonstrated by word or deed to be an enemy combatant because Obama would be surprised to learn this after killing Bin Laden who was not an eminent threat or Anwar al Awalki, an American citizen that Obama killed with a drone without due process accorded to every citizen.




Please don't use illogical reasoning just because you dislike someone. It makes it to easy to prove you wrong unless of course you simply don't care about being proven wrong. Do you? Originally Posted by HedonistForever

Really? This is an international incident. Not a domestic one. The POTUS can't just assassinate a high ranking military official from another country, in another country, just because he doesn't like them.



https://www.tehrantimes.com/news/444...-international

Many states that carry out assassinations refer to the term "targeted killing" to justify their actions. Targeted killing is the targeting of terrorist forces even far from a war situation. In the alleged targeted killing, the targeted individuals must be formally charged with terrorism, and naturally members of the liberation movement and the official personnel of the armed forces of a country cannot be the legitimate targets of the assassination unless they are in conflict and war.

The theory of targeted killing has many opponents, even with the assumption of the killing of official terrorists. The UN Special Rapporteur on Extra-Judicial summary or arbitrary Executions believes that even in the event of armed conflict, the proper requirements of the law must be observed and that a person may not be killed without a fair trial.

Some also state the theory of self-defense to justify targeted killing. Following the 9/11 attacks, the exercise of the right to self-defense against non-governmental terrorist groups was debated and emphasized in Resolutions 1373 and 1386.

In this regard, it should be noted that in the case of self-defense the existence of hostility and the necessity of defense are essential and political conflicts and baseless accusations cannot be a good reason for assassinating the other party.

There are some significant points regarding the assassination of commander Soleimani:

1. Iran and the U.S. have not been at war when commander Soleimani was assassinated. In definition of armed conflict, Article 2 of the Geneva Conventions reads: the present Convention shall apply to all cases of declared war or of any other armed conflict which may arise between two or more of the High Contracting Parties, even if the state of war is not recognized by one of them. The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) also describes the armed conflict as the use of armed forces by two states.

The question now is that on what front Iran and the U.S. are involved in an armed conflict that the U.S. considers an Iranian military official, who was attending an official meeting outside the territory of Iran, as a legitimate target?

2. Another considerable point is that the U.S. has resort to the allegation of “Terrorist act by the IRGC”. In this regard, it should be noted that the U.S. claims over calling the IRGC terrorist is completely illegal and contrary to international law.

The IRGC is part of the Iranian official sovereignty, and under Article 2 of The U.N. Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property, it is not possible for the U.S. to prosecute the Iranian government through domestic courts.

On the other hand, under Article 5 of the Convention, U.S. domestic courts cannot prosecute the IRGC, an element of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and its members. Therefore, considering the IRGC as terrorist to justify hostile acts is futile. The U.S. cannot unilaterally declare the IRGC a terrorist organization and fight it, while no international body, including the Security Council, considers the IRGC to be a terrorist organization.

Meanwhile, the IRGC is a main military body in Iran and follows the provisions of the Geneva Convention, so it cannot be known as terrorist.

Accordingly, Soleimani's assassination is undoubtedly a clear violation of all rules on armed conflicts and legitimate defense mechanisms in the world. Therefore, the U.S. cannot legally justify its act of terrorist.

I guess it's not hard to make someone feel stupid when they know they are stupid. Do you know that was stupid?

You're one to talk about stupid. Congrats on being an Iranian agent.
From Wikipedia not a rightwing source...COMPREHENSION is something you lack!!





In March 2007, Soleimani was included on a list of Iranian individuals targeted with sanctions in United Nations Security Council Resolution 1747.[96] On 18 May 2011, he was sanctioned again by the U.S. along with Syrian president Bashar al-Assad and other senior Syrian officials due to his alleged involvement in providing material support to the Syrian government.[53]
On 24 June 2011, the Official Journal of the European Union said the three Iranian Revolutionary Guard members now subject to sanctions had been "providing equipment and support to help the Syrian government suppress protests in Syria".[97] The Iranians added to the EU sanctions list were two Revolutionary Guard commanders, Soleimani, Mohammad Ali Jafari, and the Guard's deputy commander for intelligence, Hossein Taeb.[98] Soleimani was also sanctioned by the Swiss government in September 2011 on the same grounds cited by the European Union.[99]
In 2007, the U.S. included him in a "Designation of Iranian Entities and Individuals for Proliferation Activities and Support for Terrorism", which forbade U.S. citizens from doing business with him.[55][100] The list, published in the EU's Official Journal on 24 June 2011, also included a Syrian property firm, an investment fund and two other enterprises accused of funding the Syrian government. The list also included Mohammad Ali Jafari and Hossein Taeb.[101]
On 13 November 2018, the U.S. sanctioned an Iraqi military leader named Shibl Muhsin 'Ubayd Al-Zaydi and others who allegedly were acting on Soleimani's behalf in financing military actions in Syria or otherwise providing support for terrorism in the region.[102]