Hundreds of foreign students in the U.S. have been told they must self-deport or they will be forcibly deported for campus activism—including attending protests or posting on social media.
This comes after the launch of AI system "Catch and Revoke", which trawls social media for politically incorrect speech. Speaking to reporters, Rubio said ‘Every time I find one of these lunatics, I take away their visas… At some point, I hope we run out.’
There are over 1.1 million international students in the U.S. today.
https://t.co/XbepcHcepJ
[Scott Ritter: "I've had an interesting exchange about the Vietnam War. You know, we could have ended that instantly. And there were plans to do so. Nuke Hai Phong. Nuke Ha Noi. War's over. Ends instantly. We didn't—because we made a decision that that's not in our best interest, that that's not the right direction to go. But we didn't not do that because we were afraid of anything. We made it because it was the right decision."]
Scott, thank you for that unfiltered glimpse into the heart of Western imperial psychology.
It's always chilling—and useful—when the mask slips.
So now we have it, in your own words:
The United States considered nuking Vietnam.
Not as a last resort.
But as an option.
A plan.
A thing placed calmly on the table like a napkin.
Hai Phong. Ha Noi.
Cities full of children, women, and elders.
You say, "We didn’t do it—not because we were afraid—but because we decided it wasn’t in our best interest."
Not morally wrong.
Not a war crime.
Just not convenient.
That’s all your conscience can offer: cost-benefit analysis.
And you still think Iran is the threat?
Let me explain something as simply as possible, since clarity seems to elude you despite your obsession with charts and doctrine:
The fact that America had plans to commit nuclear genocide against a people fighting for their own land—and only backed off because it wasn’t strategically "optimal"—doesn’t make you disciplined.
It makes you monstrous.
And now, you drag that same mindset into this century, repeating the same delusion: that nuclear annihilation is always on the table, just waiting for the right justification.
Iran, this time.
Always someone else.
Always another "outlaw nation."
But never you.
You even try to dress this madness in legal ritual: Chapter 7 resolution, congressional authority, existential threat.
You think if you baptize war crimes in procedure, they’ll come out clean.
But here’s the truth, Scott:
The U.S. never needed a nation to "self-identify" as an existential threat.
It creates them.
Manufactures them.
Then nukes them—if not physically, then economically, diplomatically, psychologically.
You did it to Vietnam.
You’re trying it with Iran.
And now, the world is watching—and I hope, finally, the world sees.
Not just the hypocrisy.
But the sickness.
Because what you’ve described isn’t defense.
It’s pathology.
It’s empire so obsessed with control that it views any refusal to kneel as grounds for annihilation.
You speak of restraint, but what you really mean is the luxury of pacing your violence.
You speak of justice, but what you really mean is the theater that precedes the bombing.
And you speak of America’s right to destroy nations if they cross a threshold—but what you’ll never admit is that the only real threshold is independence.
You know why you didn’t nuke Vietnam, Scott?
Because deep down, you knew it wouldn’t kill us.
Not really.
Not spiritually.
And that’s what still haunts you.
That’s what haunts all of empire.
You can bomb cities.
You can poison rivers.
But you cannot kill the will of a people who’ve looked death in the eye and kept walking.
Iran has that will now.
And you know it.
So keep talking about nukes.
Because every time you do, the world sees the truth more clearly:
The greatest threat to humanity isn’t Iran.
It’s the system you serve.
The logic you defend.
The dead-eyed doctrine you recite.
And the fact that you still don’t realize this?
That’s what makes you dangerous.
But also—inevitable in your own collapse.
@KMiah2019 If China is controlled by Zionists, then China and the USA would be best buddies and Israel would be China’s “most important ally”.
Thankfully that’s not the case.
But you are too brainwashed to use logical reasoning to work that out.
Stupid Denmark followed Zionist controlled USA into every immoral war of aggression in the Middle East for Israel.
Now the same Zionist controlled USA wants to steal Greenland from the Danes.
Karma.
And no, Denmark isn’t going to go to war with Zionist USA over Greenland.
The Danish military are only good at bombing countries that can’t really fight back.
Danes are screwed, and their leaders will try to spin this humiliation as Denmark respecting Greenland’s choice.
This Fox News host is simply being brutally honest.
The U.S. sees Japanese as nothing but a conquered people that have no dignity.
America nuked them twice & they still regard them as allies & kiss their boots.
And some fools in Japan still think China is their enemy 🤦♂️
🇺🇲🇩🇰🇯🇵 Fox News is mocking Denmark and Japan:
"We don't need friends.
If we have to we will burn down a few bridges with Denmark to take Greenland.
We’re big boys. We dropped a-bombs on Japan and now they are our ally."
@BowTiedYukon Same energy as those White climbers who want to conquer Mt. Everest but got Nepalese Sherpas to carry their massive bags & tents for them.
@haugejostein China is too lenient. This is why the Niger gov dared to seize a Chinese state owned company in broad daylight.
They knew China is too nice to take harsh measures against them.
They would never dare do that to an American firm lest they get bombed and regime-changed.
JD Vance claimed the Danish didn’t look after Greenland well, so the U.S. now have the moral imperative to steal the territory from Denmark.
If that’s the logic of the Trump admin, then perhaps China should liberate Americans from the clutches of the Zionist ruling elites.
NEW: 🇺🇲🇩🇰 JD Vance in gangsta-style threatens Denmark:
"Our message to Denmark is very simple: YOU have not done a good job by the people of Greenland. You have underinvested in the people, and the security architecture... that has to change."
Scott, let me explain something to you—since you seem desperate to be taken seriously by people who still think power is proven by how well they can recite acronyms and parade troop movements.
You say I’m not a serious person because I refuse to worship treaties that exist only to chain the weak while shielding the crimes of the strong.
But here’s the truth:
You confuse being "at the table" with having a soul.
You measure intellect by proximity to power, not by clarity of conscience.
You think "serious people" are the ones who sit in rooms, dressed in suits, calculating death ratios and first-strike advantages.
As if genocide sounds more legitimate when it’s delivered in the language of think tanks.
Let me make this painfully clear:
The fact that Iran says it doesn’t want nuclear weapons is irrelevant to my point.
I’m not arguing what Iran will do.
I’m arguing what it has the right to do.
And you still haven’t answered that.
Because you can’t.
Because if Israel can stockpile warheads without signing the NPT.
If the U.S. can shred every agreement it finds inconvenient.
If the West can impose collective punishment on whole populations.
Then your entire claim about "law" is invalid before it begins.
You say I can’t be more Iranian than the Iranians?
No, Scott.
I’m being more honest than the empire that murders Iranians in the name of "stability."
You ask if I’ve served in the military?
I come from Vietnam.
We didn't need lectures in "power projection."
We taught the Pentagon what it means to bleed for an empire's arrogance.
We fought men who thought just like you: that weapons win wars, and treaties are sacred when the strong write them.
We burned their illusions in the jungles and buried their pride in the mud.
So don’t talk to me about war as if it’s a boardroom debate.
You speak of "serious people."
I speak of sovereign people.
There’s a difference.
Your "serious" world is collapsing—precisely because it thought being "serious" meant justifying terror with paperwork.
You say my argument is nonsensical because Iran says it doesn't want nukes?
But that’s the point, Scott.
They don’t have them.
They have complied.
And yet you’re still threatening them with nuclear annihilation.
So tell me: if that’s what they get for obeying, what incentive do they have to stay disarmed?
That silence you hear?
That’s the sound of your entire worldview falling apart.
And you know it.
@EminenceRouge99 Of course they are.
The U.S. ruling elites aren’t mere puppets of the Zionist billionaires. They are willing collaborators, albeit subservient to Zionist wealth & power.
This is how Israel gets the USA to do its bidding.
Zionist elites in America are the parasites that give the evil U.S. Vampire its world dominating superpowers.
However, there’s a catch to the parasitic-symbiotic relationship:
The parasites also compel its host to do the will of Israel which is often detrimental to America.
JD Vance trying to sell the idea that the U.S. is there to protect Greenland presumably from Russia & China.
This is American marketing at its finest.
In reality, the biggest threat to Greenland is from the USA which is now eyeing to annex it.
Unlike the US, China has its own way of unveiling its 6th-generation fighter jets.
No flashy PPTs, no impassioned presidential speeches, no overwhelming media propaganda.
Just non-stop test flights.
Again and again.
Even professors Jeffrey Sachs & John Mearsheimer believe that Israel runs the USA.
Any intellectually sharp, geopolitical analysts would conclude the same.
Only those who are unobservant or have dishonest agendas would claim America controls Israel.