They're guilty of being hated by Islamaphobes

Just end at May Kill Trump

Agreed... I just don't want people acting like there is nothing that Democrats can do right now, including cutting off funding, drafting resolutions, etc. Maybe they will do something for once, but I don't have my hopes up. Seeing how they literally enabled the genocide in Palestine, it seems like most of them are bought & paid for.

Democrats could file a TRO in federal court immediately asking to pause operations & that his actions violate Article I, Section 8 of the US Constitution. But they almost certainly won't, and they want you believing exactly what you do now, which is "our hands are tied, nothing we can do, send money & then we can do something, etc." The reality is a vast majority of them are funded by AIPAC & support this, and they'll almost certainly have a majority of ignorant or naive people repeating their lies.

Here are some things they could try as well:

Sponsoring a Soldier's Habeas Corpus Petition

Instead of lawmakers suing on their own behalf, a coalition of anti-war lawmakers could legally and financially back a Habeas Corpus petition for a U.S. service member currently deployed or ordered to participate in the Iran strikes.

The Strategy: The lawsuit would argue that because the war is unconstitutional and lacks congressional authorization, the soldier's deployment is an illegal deprivation of their liberty (violating their Fifth Amendment Due Process rights).
Why it could work: A soldier ordered into a combat zone undeniably has "standing"—their life and liberty are directly at risk. If a group of lawmakers files amicus briefs and publicly coordinates this lawsuit, it forces a federal judge to answer whether the military's orders are lawful. It takes the politicians out of the plaintiff's seat and puts the actual victim of the constitutional violation in front of the judge.

The "Mike Gravel Maneuver" (The Speech or Debate Clause)

If the minority party knows the administration is lying about Iran posing an "imminent threat," but the proof is highly classified, they do not need a judge or a majority to release it. They just need one brave lawmaker.

The Law: Under the Speech or Debate Clause of the Constitution (Article I, Section 6), members of Congress have absolute immunity from prosecution for anything they say or read during official legislative business.
The Action: A single lawmaker (like a dissenting member of the Intelligence or Foreign Affairs Committees) could walk onto the floor of the House or Senate, or convene a specialized subcommittee, and read the classified intelligence proving the administration is lying straight into the public Congressional Record.
The Precedent: This is exactly what Senator Mike Gravel did in 1971 when he read the top-secret Pentagon Papers into the record to expose the government's lies about the Vietnam War. The Supreme Court ruled he could not be prosecuted.
The Complicity Test: If Democrats claim they have seen intelligence proving the strikes are unjustified but refuse to read it into the record because they are afraid of losing their security clearances or violating committee rules, they are prioritizing decorum over stopping a war.

The "Senate Hold"

The U.S. Senate runs almost entirely on something called "Unanimous Consent" to function smoothly and confirm nominees.

The Law: A single Senator has the power to object to unanimous consent, placing a "hold" on Senate business.
The Action: Just one or two anti-war Senators could publicly declare that they will place a blanket hold on every single military promotion, defense contractor confirmation, and Pentagon budgetary consent request until the administration publicly releases the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) memos justifying the strikes on Iran and the civilian boats.
Why it Works: It does not require a majority. It single-handedly grinds the Pentagon's administrative machinery to a halt. If the minority party refuses to use this leverage to demand transparency for an unconstitutional war, "our hands are tied" is just an excuse.

Sponsoring a Qui Tam (Whistleblower) Lawsuit

Since minority politicians cannot sue the President directly due to "lack of standing," they can bypass the political blockade by using corporate fraud laws against the defense industry.

The Law: The False Claims Act allows private citizens with insider knowledge to file a lawsuit on behalf of the government (known as a qui tam suit) against companies defrauding the taxpayers.
The Action: Minority lawmakers could actively solicit and legally shield a whistleblower from inside a defense contractor (like the companies manufacturing the missiles hitting Iran). The lawsuit would argue that because the military operation violates the War Powers Resolution and the Anti-Deficiency Act, the defense contractor is fulfilling an illegal contract and fraudulently billing the U.S. taxpayer.
Why it Works: A federal judge cannot throw this out using the "Political Question" doctrine because it is technically a corporate fraud case. It forces the court to examine whether the underlying contract (the war) is legally authorized.

Forcing Privileged Floor Votes (The Complicity Test)

If minority lawmakers say they are powerless because they don't control the House, they are lying by omission. Certain laws allow any single member of Congress to force a mandatory floor vote that the majority party cannot block.

The Arms Export Control Act (AECA): Any senator can introduce a Joint Resolution of Disapproval to block the sale or transfer of specific weapons (like the missiles being used in Iran or Israel). Bernie Sanders used this recently regarding Gaza.
The War Powers "Concurrent Resolution": Any member can introduce a resolution under Section 5c directing the President to remove troops engaged in unauthorized hostilities.
The Litmus Test: If a Democrat goes on television and says, "We must stop this," but refuses to introduce or vote for an AECA or War Powers resolution, they are complicit. Forcing the vote is the only way to put every single member of Congress on the public record.

I think it’s important to take note of the large number of Jewish anti-Zionists who devote their lives to opposing Zionism: the Jewish Voice for Peace, Norman Finkelstein, Ilan Pape, Max Blumenthal, Aaron Mate, etc. I have great respect for these people. They need to be protected.

I completely agree with your first point. It is absolutely crucial to acknowledge, respect, and protect Jewish anti-Zionists like Norman Finkelstein, Ilan Pappé, Max Blumenthal, and organizations like JVP who dedicate their lives to opposing this.

But I think it’s a little dishonest to say that Zionism has nothing to do with Judaism. Zionism is Jewish nationalism

I have to push back hard on your second point. It is actually historically inaccurate to claim that Zionism is simply "Jewish nationalism" or that it is intrinsically tied to Judaism as a whole. If we look at the actual historical foundations and the writings of early Zionists, the movement wasn't built on uniting or uplifting the Jewish people. It was actually built on a deep, eugenic-driven disdain for the vast majority of Diaspora Jews.

Early Zionism was heavily rooted in Shlilat Ha'Golah (Negation of the Diaspora). The founders didn't view their project as a home for all Jews; they viewed the traditional "ghetto Jew" with absolute revulsion and operated on a framework of psychological essentialism and social dominance orientation.

Here is what the actual founders of the movement said and did regarding the Jewish masses:

Chaim Weizmann (First President of Israel): Weizmann didn't want the Jewish masses saved; he viewed them as an inferior caste. In 1937, reflecting on the fate of Europe's Jews, he literally said: "Millions of Jews are dust on the wheels of history that will have to be blown away. They must accept their fate. We do not want them crowding into our Tel Aviv, turning it into a low-grade ghetto."
Ze'ev Jabotinsky (Founder of Revisionist Zionism): Jabotinsky built his movement on collective narcissism, violently contrasting his ideal new "Hebrew" with the traditional Diaspora Jew (whom he derisively called the "Yid"). He wrote: "Because the Yid is ugly, sickly, and lacks decorum, we shall endow the ideal image of the Hebrew with masculine beauty. The Yid is trodden upon and easily frightened... The Yid is despised by all.
Arthur Ruppin (Father of Zionist Sociology): Ruppin openly embraced eugenics and racial hygiene, treating the Jewish diaspora as raw "human material" to be filtered. He argued for strict selection policies to keep the mentally ill, physically weak, or socially "undesirable" Jews out of Palestine so they wouldn't pollute the new nationalist project.
David Ben-Gurion (First Prime Minister of Israel): He frequently and dismissively referred to Diaspora Jews, including Holocaust survivors arriving in Israel, as "human dust" that had no roots and needed to be entirely forged into something else.

This wasn't just rhetoric; it dictated real-world actions where the masses were sacrificed for a "chosen few." Look at Rudolf Kasztner, the Zionist leader in Hungary during WWII. He negotiated directly with Adolf Eichmann to secure a rescue train for a few hundred prominent Zionists and wealthy individuals. Meanwhile, he intentionally kept quiet as over 430,000 Hungarian Jews were systematically deported to Auschwitz. During the 1954 Kasztner trial in Israel, the presiding judge literally ruled that Kasztner had "sold his soul to the devil" because his silence prevented mass panic and resistance, effectively sacrificing the Jewish masses to secure his specific, elite group.

The fact that modern organizations like the ADL, AIPAC, or the American Jewish Committee have successfully conflated Zionism with Judaism today is a massive modern PR victory, but it ignores history. Zionism wasn't founded as broad "Jewish nationalism" to protect all Jews. It was founded by men who viewed the diaspora existence as a parasitic disease, embraced eugenics, and actively discarded the masses they deemed unworthy of their new ethnostate.

Zionists uses Judaism for their sadistic, eugenic, & psychotic lust for domination. Diaspora Jews were some of the most hated people by Zionists, with many prominent Zionists at the time complicit in many Jewish deaths. Don't let them try to trick you into thinking this is a Jewish thing.

Saying no one wants this is a lie. First Israel-firsters want this, the military industrial complex, Lindsay Graham & the neocons, Trump, Fetterman (what a joke), soon to be MGP & all the AIPAC funded Democrats. You won't see most Democrats doing a damn thing about this... Don't forget they can file the paperwork tomorrow asking for a TRO in federal court regarding abuse of war powers. Federal Judges are what has stopped Trump's illegal actions many of times. But they'll conveniently "forget" that is an option & most Americans believe whatever corporate media sells them.

Democrats will make excuses that their hands are tied, just like they made excuses why they needed to support genocide & why Democrats doing nothing or being hypocritical is okay. You'll see them on here, they swarm Lemmy looking to attack anyone that doesn't submit to the party. I'm pretty sure the fascism claims by them were projection all along. I get death threats & death wishes by them on here regularly. They say, you didn't vote for my candidate & therefore you deserve to die.

Makes sense that the current government would switch to sister molester AI

Duh, Israel has kept the media out for a reason.

At this rate the establishment will be pushing Hillary as the only legitimate candidate to challenge Republicans in 2028.

You don't fit the extremist type at all. I hope you have a great day & possibly check in with your psychiatrist.

Democrats would prefer Israel bombs Iran first.

Fixed it for you.

Dershowitz, the same gross creepy lawyer that helped Epstein with his sweetheart deal & taught at Harvard was not only known for his frequent lectures about how men accused of rape are the real victims, but that they should lower the age of consent. And he was accused by Virginia Guffrie, and recent files shows her lawyer likely was working against her. And his explanation is that he kept his panties on while getting a massage. This is who the media frequently interviews to pedosplain the tragedy.

You know sadly like you already see in response here many on the left have already bought the MSM hasbara hook, line & sinker. Let's not forget how many acquisitions we saw of major media networks recently by major IDF donor Larry Ellison & other Zionists. Netanyahu was bragging about being able to control the information war as a result. The sad truth is people are just so easy to manipulate & they have such a big desire to follow whatever they perceive as the mainstream narrative. Like if the news is pushing some dumb Hollywood sequel they in unison all start talking about it & their entire identity revolves around fads.

Just as they voted for & was complicit in genocide, and then complain non-stop about ICE killing a very small fraction of people compared to the IDF, they will do the same with war. When it is time for elections they'll virtue signal & pretend they were against the disaster they actively enabled or that they're the perpetual victim for potentially ever having to deal with any repercussions of their actions.

Lol, they dug their grave by being something Israel can't turn into another Gaza. Netanyahu has been pushing for it for years but he wants to put American lives in danger. But sure.. say whatever Bush 2.0 neocon talking points help you sleep at night as to why the US needs this war with Iran on behalf of Israel. I'm sure the MSM liberal media has you convinced it's for all the right reasons.

They have an amazing reputation on open source. I think you're conflating reputation on open source with reputation because of their willingness to understand & criticize issues with some other open source products. The issues with F-Droid's security model have long been known & discussed by other prominent developers. It is why Obtanium has become increasingly popular. Heck, it is even mentioned on Privacy Guides. Their criticism towards Firefox is to my knowledge more specific to the Android security model & the reality is that Chromium provides significantly better sandboxing there. That isn't an attack on Firefox itself but design choices or lack or commitment to the fundamentals, which Mozilla has routinely engaged in with Pocket, reselling Mullvad while breaking their browser support for tab container VPN integration if a user has Mullvad installed, their recent AI push, etc. But again they are specifically evaluating & criticizing the security or technical decisions in such instances. Likewise, it is fair to hate on Manifestat v3 used in newer Chrome extensions because not all the v2 features were supported out of the box, but there is no question that the security model in Manifest v2 was significantly worse & would be very easy for a malicious developer to have intercepted & logged all the requests. Manifest v3 solves that & they have uBlock Origin Lite now. I hope to see further improvements in this area. But criticizing the decisions of an open source project, especially as it pertains to security, does not make them anti-open source.

Time to finally move to GrapheneOS. Hope they finish polishing it, including things like automated backups. I'm going to donate to them. They have consistently proved themselves to be a legitimate project.

Lol, who bought the narrative that Rudy Giuliani was a great mayor during the attacks. He was saying recently that Palestinians are born terrorists. Hopefully Epstein will finally convince people to not swallow the boot of government narratives.

I can confirm worked for me this evening when I checked. Must have got the error shortly after it was setup.

It looks like the blog you're linking to has an invalid certificate, so maybe it's on to something?