Trump govt is deporting Green Card holder student exercising free speech

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How about supporters of violent settlers in the West Bank? Should we deport them?

With provisional green cards? Fine by me.

but that didn't happen. Why?

Yes that’s exactly what happened
https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/israel-us-deny-visas-extremist-settliers-west-bank/

Us denied visas to extremist West Bank settlers

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What does it mean to "support Hamas?"
Pledging allegience to Hamas would certainly count.
Transferring money to "Hamas Inc." via wire transfer would count.
Saying "I think Hamas' actions are justified" seems like a grey area.

Saying I want a cease fire and think Israel is committing genocide doesn't necessarily equate to "supporting Hamas." Did Hamas even want a cease-fire? Certainly on their terms, but that applies to any belligerent. For all we know he might hate Hamas and prefer the PLO or some other organization.

What evidence is there that the student "supported Hamas?" Merely asking for a ceasefire or asking Columbia to divest, would not seem to qualify as "supporting terrorism."

How 'bout this (which I posted earlier)?

Khalil acted as a negotiator and sometimes spokesperson for CUAD (Columbia University Apartheid Divest).

CUAD explicitly and officially issued a statement supporting Hamas and 10/7. As quoted in the Times:

“We support liberation by any means necessary, including armed resistance,” the group, Columbia University Apartheid Divest, said in its statement revoking the apology.

The group marked the anniversary of the Oct. 7 attack on Israel by distributing a newspaper with a headline that used Hamas’s name for it: “One Year Since Al-Aqsa Flood, Revolution Until Victory,” it read, over a picture of Hamas fighters breaching the security fence to Israel. And the group posted an essay calling the attack a “moral, military and political victory” and quoting Ismail Haniyeh, the assassinated former political leader of Hamas.

“The Palestinian resistance is moving their struggle to a new phase of escalation and it is our duty to meet them there,” the group wrote on Oct. 7 on Telegram. “It is our duty to fight for our freedom!”

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/09/nyregion/c...ian-group-hamas.html

Exactly. This guy wasn’t just walking around with a cardboard sign reading “Cease Fire.”

So, if a South African living in the US with a green card during the 80s supported Nelson Mandela and the ANC, should he have been deported back to South Africa? Mandela and the ANC were considered terrorists until 2008.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/us-government-considered-nelson-mandela-terrorist-until-2008-flna2d11708787

DP. Let's make the hypothetical match the current situation:

How 'bout if our imaginary South African issued a statement supporting murdering white South African civilians en masse and calling for the destruction of western civilization (as CUAD has done)?

Deportable?

So make up some sh#t and deport them? Why do Jewish people get to decide who is arrested and deported and who stays in the US? Why does every Ivy League president have to be a pro Israeli extremists?

This has gone too far. It is time for the US to cut all ties with Israel. Any pro Israeli should be deported to Israel. These people will be at home in the apartheid society of religious extremist.

Sadly for you most Israeli supporters are US citizens. Unlike this guy.

Israel is an enemy of the US. Any supporter or people who claim Israel is their homeland must be deported. Trump is building the infrastructure to deport 12 million immigrants and the legal foundation to remove birth right citizenship. We can use this system to remove the true threat to America. This needs to take priority over illegals. Luckily there is no due process. That would slow things down.

Analogies not your strong suit I see. Too bad they removed them from the SAT.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What does it mean to "support Hamas?"
Pledging allegience to Hamas would certainly count.
Transferring money to "Hamas Inc." via wire transfer would count.
Saying "I think Hamas' actions are justified" seems like a grey area.

Saying I want a cease fire and think Israel is committing genocide doesn't necessarily equate to "supporting Hamas." Did Hamas even want a cease-fire? Certainly on their terms, but that applies to any belligerent. For all we know he might hate Hamas and prefer the PLO or some other organization.

What evidence is there that the student "supported Hamas?" Merely asking for a ceasefire or asking Columbia to divest, would not seem to qualify as "supporting terrorism."

How 'bout this (which I posted earlier)?

Khalil acted as a negotiator and sometimes spokesperson for CUAD (Columbia University Apartheid Divest).

CUAD explicitly and officially issued a statement supporting Hamas and 10/7. As quoted in the Times:

“We support liberation by any means necessary, including armed resistance,” the group, Columbia University Apartheid Divest, said in its statement revoking the apology.

The group marked the anniversary of the Oct. 7 attack on Israel by distributing a newspaper with a headline that used Hamas’s name for it: “One Year Since Al-Aqsa Flood, Revolution Until Victory,” it read, over a picture of Hamas fighters breaching the security fence to Israel. And the group posted an essay calling the attack a “moral, military and political victory” and quoting Ismail Haniyeh, the assassinated former political leader of Hamas.

“The Palestinian resistance is moving their struggle to a new phase of escalation and it is our duty to meet them there,” the group wrote on Oct. 7 on Telegram. “It is our duty to fight for our freedom!”

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/09/nyregion/c...ian-group-hamas.html

Exactly. This guy wasn’t just walking around with a cardboard sign reading “Cease Fire.”

So, if a South African living in the US with a green card during the 80s supported Nelson Mandela and the ANC, should he have been deported back to South Africa? Mandela and the ANC were considered terrorists until 2008.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/us-government-considered-nelson-mandela-terrorist-until-2008-flna2d11708787

DP. Let's make the hypothetical match the current situation:

How 'bout if our imaginary South African issued a statement supporting murdering white South African civilians en masse and calling for the destruction of western civilization (as CUAD has done)?

Deportable?

Can you provide a cite for the bold -- a statement CUAD made that explicitly supported the murder of Israeli's on Oct. 7th and calling for the destruction of western civilization?

Sure.

1. CUAD calls for "total eradication of western civilization". And, as a bonus, "As the fascism ingrained in the American consciousness becomes ever more explicit and irrefutable, we seek community and instruction from militants in the Global South, who have been on the frontlines in the fight against tyranny and domination which undergird the imperialist world order,” the post reads.

https://abc3340.com/news/nation-world/anti-israel-columbia-students-call-for-total-eradication-of-western-civilization-divest-palestine-hamas-bangladesh-protests-demonstrations

2. As for explicitly supporting the murder of Israelis, the quote I provided above unequivocally does exactly that:

The group marked the anniversary of the Oct. 7 attack on Israel by distributing a newspaper with a headline that used Hamas’s name for it: “One Year Since Al-Aqsa Flood, Revolution Until Victory,” it read, over a picture of Hamas fighters breaching the security fence to Israel. And the group posted an essay calling the attack a “moral, military and political victory” and quoting Ismail Haniyeh, the assassinated former political leader of Hamas.

“The Palestinian resistance is moving their struggle to a new phase of escalation and it is our duty to meet them there,” the group wrote on Oct. 7 on Telegram. “It is our duty to fight for our freedom!”

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/09/nyregion/c...ian-group-hamas.html

Can you link to a source that is not pro Israel propaganda? Remember the NYT had that false story about the rapes. Never heard of the https://abc3340.com. Is that an Israeli outlet?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LOL.

Seriously- this guy was a few steps away from driving a stolen Uber into Times Square.

He is getting off easy. Send him back to wherever and let IDF or one of our drones deal with him.

Left is getting worked up about an agitator looking for a fight - he will get it; just out of US.

This man was a Columbia graduate with an eight months pregnant wife.

This is terrifying and no wonder we have a terror problem at all with the mentality that you just mentioned.

What if you were taken from your home at random thanks to your religion? That used to happen to Jews not even 100 years ago you know. You’re supporting a Zionist Gestapo

No equivalence. He was arrested not at random but for his conduct, not his religious affiliation. His wife's pregnancy is irrelevant to anything, as is the fact he is married, or if he had 19 children already.

You may or may not think his conduct rises to the level of a deportable offense. That's a function of the conduct and the relevant law.

It's unhelpful to make patently unsupportable and clearly wrong claims about the basis for his detention.

Arrested without a warrant?

Warrantless arrests are permissible under many circumstances.

Then describe one that allows arrest at your home by fed agents not investigating a crime.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What does it mean to "support Hamas?"
Pledging allegience to Hamas would certainly count.
Transferring money to "Hamas Inc." via wire transfer would count.
Saying "I think Hamas' actions are justified" seems like a grey area.

Saying I want a cease fire and think Israel is committing genocide doesn't necessarily equate to "supporting Hamas." Did Hamas even want a cease-fire? Certainly on their terms, but that applies to any belligerent. For all we know he might hate Hamas and prefer the PLO or some other organization.

What evidence is there that the student "supported Hamas?" Merely asking for a ceasefire or asking Columbia to divest, would not seem to qualify as "supporting terrorism."

How 'bout this (which I posted earlier)?

Khalil acted as a negotiator and sometimes spokesperson for CUAD (Columbia University Apartheid Divest).

CUAD explicitly and officially issued a statement supporting Hamas and 10/7. As quoted in the Times:

“We support liberation by any means necessary, including armed resistance,” the group, Columbia University Apartheid Divest, said in its statement revoking the apology.

The group marked the anniversary of the Oct. 7 attack on Israel by distributing a newspaper with a headline that used Hamas’s name for it: “One Year Since Al-Aqsa Flood, Revolution Until Victory,” it read, over a picture of Hamas fighters breaching the security fence to Israel. And the group posted an essay calling the attack a “moral, military and political victory” and quoting Ismail Haniyeh, the assassinated former political leader of Hamas.

“The Palestinian resistance is moving their struggle to a new phase of escalation and it is our duty to meet them there,” the group wrote on Oct. 7 on Telegram. “It is our duty to fight for our freedom!”

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/09/nyregion/c...ian-group-hamas.html

Exactly. This guy wasn’t just walking around with a cardboard sign reading “Cease Fire.”

So, if a South African living in the US with a green card during the 80s supported Nelson Mandela and the ANC, should he have been deported back to South Africa? Mandela and the ANC were considered terrorists until 2008.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/us-government-considered-nelson-mandela-terrorist-until-2008-flna2d11708787

DP. Let's make the hypothetical match the current situation:

How 'bout if our imaginary South African issued a statement supporting murdering white South African civilians en masse and calling for the destruction of western civilization (as CUAD has done)?

Deportable?

So make up some sh#t and deport them? Why do Jewish people get to decide who is arrested and deported and who stays in the US? Why does every Ivy League president have to be a pro Israeli extremists?

This has gone too far. It is time for the US to cut all ties with Israel. Any pro Israeli should be deported to Israel. These people will be at home in the apartheid society of religious extremist.

Sadly for you most Israeli supporters are US citizens. Unlike this guy.

Israel is an enemy of the US. Any supporter or people who claim Israel is their homeland must be deported. Trump is building the infrastructure to deport 12 million immigrants and the legal foundation to remove birth right citizenship. We can use this system to remove the true threat to America. This needs to take priority over illegals. Luckily there is no due process. That would slow things down.

Analogies not your strong suit I see. Too bad they removed them from the SAT.

Too bad it is not an analogy. How is the weather in Tel Aviv?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What does it mean to "support Hamas?"
Pledging allegience to Hamas would certainly count.
Transferring money to "Hamas Inc." via wire transfer would count.
Saying "I think Hamas' actions are justified" seems like a grey area.

Saying I want a cease fire and think Israel is committing genocide doesn't necessarily equate to "supporting Hamas." Did Hamas even want a cease-fire? Certainly on their terms, but that applies to any belligerent. For all we know he might hate Hamas and prefer the PLO or some other organization.

What evidence is there that the student "supported Hamas?" Merely asking for a ceasefire or asking Columbia to divest, would not seem to qualify as "supporting terrorism."

How 'bout this (which I posted earlier)?

Khalil acted as a negotiator and sometimes spokesperson for CUAD (Columbia University Apartheid Divest).

CUAD explicitly and officially issued a statement supporting Hamas and 10/7. As quoted in the Times:

“We support liberation by any means necessary, including armed resistance,” the group, Columbia University Apartheid Divest, said in its statement revoking the apology.

The group marked the anniversary of the Oct. 7 attack on Israel by distributing a newspaper with a headline that used Hamas’s name for it: “One Year Since Al-Aqsa Flood, Revolution Until Victory,” it read, over a picture of Hamas fighters breaching the security fence to Israel. And the group posted an essay calling the attack a “moral, military and political victory” and quoting Ismail Haniyeh, the assassinated former political leader of Hamas.

“The Palestinian resistance is moving their struggle to a new phase of escalation and it is our duty to meet them there,” the group wrote on Oct. 7 on Telegram. “It is our duty to fight for our freedom!”

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/09/nyregion/c...ian-group-hamas.html

Exactly. This guy wasn’t just walking around with a cardboard sign reading “Cease Fire.”

So, if a South African living in the US with a green card during the 80s supported Nelson Mandela and the ANC, should he have been deported back to South Africa? Mandela and the ANC were considered terrorists until 2008.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/us-government-considered-nelson-mandela-terrorist-until-2008-flna2d11708787

DP. Let's make the hypothetical match the current situation:

How 'bout if our imaginary South African issued a statement supporting murdering white South African civilians en masse and calling for the destruction of western civilization (as CUAD has done)?

Deportable?

Can you provide a cite for the bold -- a statement CUAD made that explicitly supported the murder of Israeli's on Oct. 7th and calling for the destruction of western civilization?

Sure.

1. CUAD calls for "total eradication of western civilization". And, as a bonus, "As the fascism ingrained in the American consciousness becomes ever more explicit and irrefutable, we seek community and instruction from militants in the Global South, who have been on the frontlines in the fight against tyranny and domination which undergird the imperialist world order,” the post reads.

https://abc3340.com/news/nation-world/anti-israel-columbia-students-call-for-total-eradication-of-western-civilization-divest-palestine-hamas-bangladesh-protests-demonstrations

2. As for explicitly supporting the murder of Israelis, the quote I provided above unequivocally does exactly that:

The group marked the anniversary of the Oct. 7 attack on Israel by distributing a newspaper with a headline that used Hamas’s name for it: “One Year Since Al-Aqsa Flood, Revolution Until Victory,” it read, over a picture of Hamas fighters breaching the security fence to Israel. And the group posted an essay calling the attack a “moral, military and political victory” and quoting Ismail Haniyeh, the assassinated former political leader of Hamas.

“The Palestinian resistance is moving their struggle to a new phase of escalation and it is our duty to meet them there,” the group wrote on Oct. 7 on Telegram. “It is our duty to fight for our freedom!”

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/09/nyregion/c...ian-group-hamas.html

Can you link to a source that is not pro Israel propaganda? Remember the NYT had that false story about the rapes. Never heard of the https://abc3340.com. Is that an Israeli outlet?

C'mon. Let's discuss in good faith here.

These are all direct quotes from CUAD's social media. Don't believe me? Check them out yourself via this link from Columbia's newspaper: https://www.columbiaspectator.com/news/2024/10/11/university-condemns-calls-for-violence-on-campus-following-cuad-sjp-statements/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What does it mean to "support Hamas?"
Pledging allegience to Hamas would certainly count.
Transferring money to "Hamas Inc." via wire transfer would count.
Saying "I think Hamas' actions are justified" seems like a grey area.

Saying I want a cease fire and think Israel is committing genocide doesn't necessarily equate to "supporting Hamas." Did Hamas even want a cease-fire? Certainly on their terms, but that applies to any belligerent. For all we know he might hate Hamas and prefer the PLO or some other organization.

What evidence is there that the student "supported Hamas?" Merely asking for a ceasefire or asking Columbia to divest, would not seem to qualify as "supporting terrorism."

How 'bout this (which I posted earlier)?

Khalil acted as a negotiator and sometimes spokesperson for CUAD (Columbia University Apartheid Divest).

CUAD explicitly and officially issued a statement supporting Hamas and 10/7. As quoted in the Times:

“We support liberation by any means necessary, including armed resistance,” the group, Columbia University Apartheid Divest, said in its statement revoking the apology.

The group marked the anniversary of the Oct. 7 attack on Israel by distributing a newspaper with a headline that used Hamas’s name for it: “One Year Since Al-Aqsa Flood, Revolution Until Victory,” it read, over a picture of Hamas fighters breaching the security fence to Israel. And the group posted an essay calling the attack a “moral, military and political victory” and quoting Ismail Haniyeh, the assassinated former political leader of Hamas.

“The Palestinian resistance is moving their struggle to a new phase of escalation and it is our duty to meet them there,” the group wrote on Oct. 7 on Telegram. “It is our duty to fight for our freedom!”

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/09/nyregion/c...ian-group-hamas.html

Exactly. This guy wasn’t just walking around with a cardboard sign reading “Cease Fire.”

So, if a South African living in the US with a green card during the 80s supported Nelson Mandela and the ANC, should he have been deported back to South Africa? Mandela and the ANC were considered terrorists until 2008.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/us-government-considered-nelson-mandela-terrorist-until-2008-flna2d11708787

DP. Let's make the hypothetical match the current situation:

How 'bout if our imaginary South African issued a statement supporting murdering white South African civilians en masse and calling for the destruction of western civilization (as CUAD has done)?

Deportable?

Probably not if he's white.

Also, a lot of Irish Americans supported and even funded and provided arms to the IRA, a terrorist organization. They weren't deported either. Why? Cause they are white people.

You are comparing citizen rights to immigrant rights, which is not at all the same for good reason. And you are wrong. Sinn Fein leaders have been denied visas to the US due to their IRA ties, and denied green cards. It is our policy not to harbor violent extremists of any cause, and it’s a good one.
https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/sinn-feins-ohare-denied-visa-for-trip-to-capitol-hill/26208677.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What does it mean to "support Hamas?"
Pledging allegience to Hamas would certainly count.
Transferring money to "Hamas Inc." via wire transfer would count.
Saying "I think Hamas' actions are justified" seems like a grey area.

Saying I want a cease fire and think Israel is committing genocide doesn't necessarily equate to "supporting Hamas." Did Hamas even want a cease-fire? Certainly on their terms, but that applies to any belligerent. For all we know he might hate Hamas and prefer the PLO or some other organization.

What evidence is there that the student "supported Hamas?" Merely asking for a ceasefire or asking Columbia to divest, would not seem to qualify as "supporting terrorism."

How 'bout this (which I posted earlier)?

Khalil acted as a negotiator and sometimes spokesperson for CUAD (Columbia University Apartheid Divest).

CUAD explicitly and officially issued a statement supporting Hamas and 10/7. As quoted in the Times:

“We support liberation by any means necessary, including armed resistance,” the group, Columbia University Apartheid Divest, said in its statement revoking the apology.

The group marked the anniversary of the Oct. 7 attack on Israel by distributing a newspaper with a headline that used Hamas’s name for it: “One Year Since Al-Aqsa Flood, Revolution Until Victory,” it read, over a picture of Hamas fighters breaching the security fence to Israel. And the group posted an essay calling the attack a “moral, military and political victory” and quoting Ismail Haniyeh, the assassinated former political leader of Hamas.

“The Palestinian resistance is moving their struggle to a new phase of escalation and it is our duty to meet them there,” the group wrote on Oct. 7 on Telegram. “It is our duty to fight for our freedom!”

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/09/nyregion/c...ian-group-hamas.html

Exactly. This guy wasn’t just walking around with a cardboard sign reading “Cease Fire.”

So, if a South African living in the US with a green card during the 80s supported Nelson Mandela and the ANC, should he have been deported back to South Africa? Mandela and the ANC were considered terrorists until 2008.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/us-government-considered-nelson-mandela-terrorist-until-2008-flna2d11708787

DP. Let's make the hypothetical match the current situation:

How 'bout if our imaginary South African issued a statement supporting murdering white South African civilians en masse and calling for the destruction of western civilization (as CUAD has done)?

Deportable?

Probably not if he's white.

Also, a lot of Irish Americans supported and even funded and provided arms to the IRA, a terrorist organization. They weren't deported either. Why? Cause they are white people.

You are comparing citizen rights to immigrant rights, which is not at all the same for good reason. And you are wrong. Sinn Fein leaders have been denied visas to the US due to their IRA ties, and denied green cards. It is our policy not to harbor violent extremists of any cause, and it’s a good one.
https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/sinn-feins-ohare-denied-visa-for-trip-to-capitol-hill/26208677.html

Green card immigrants for have rights and protection.
Uh oh, Trump goofed and now needs you apologists to smoke-and-mirrors for him

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What does it mean to "support Hamas?"
Pledging allegience to Hamas would certainly count.
Transferring money to "Hamas Inc." via wire transfer would count.
Saying "I think Hamas' actions are justified" seems like a grey area.

Saying I want a cease fire and think Israel is committing genocide doesn't necessarily equate to "supporting Hamas." Did Hamas even want a cease-fire? Certainly on their terms, but that applies to any belligerent. For all we know he might hate Hamas and prefer the PLO or some other organization.

What evidence is there that the student "supported Hamas?" Merely asking for a ceasefire or asking Columbia to divest, would not seem to qualify as "supporting terrorism."

How 'bout this (which I posted earlier)?

Khalil acted as a negotiator and sometimes spokesperson for CUAD (Columbia University Apartheid Divest).

CUAD explicitly and officially issued a statement supporting Hamas and 10/7. As quoted in the Times:

“We support liberation by any means necessary, including armed resistance,” the group, Columbia University Apartheid Divest, said in its statement revoking the apology.

The group marked the anniversary of the Oct. 7 attack on Israel by distributing a newspaper with a headline that used Hamas’s name for it: “One Year Since Al-Aqsa Flood, Revolution Until Victory,” it read, over a picture of Hamas fighters breaching the security fence to Israel. And the group posted an essay calling the attack a “moral, military and political victory” and quoting Ismail Haniyeh, the assassinated former political leader of Hamas.

“The Palestinian resistance is moving their struggle to a new phase of escalation and it is our duty to meet them there,” the group wrote on Oct. 7 on Telegram. “It is our duty to fight for our freedom!”

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/09/nyregion/c...ian-group-hamas.html

Exactly. This guy wasn’t just walking around with a cardboard sign reading “Cease Fire.”

So, if a South African living in the US with a green card during the 80s supported Nelson Mandela and the ANC, should he have been deported back to South Africa? Mandela and the ANC were considered terrorists until 2008.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/us-government-considered-nelson-mandela-terrorist-until-2008-flna2d11708787

DP. Let's make the hypothetical match the current situation:

How 'bout if our imaginary South African issued a statement supporting murdering white South African civilians en masse and calling for the destruction of western civilization (as CUAD has done)?

Deportable?

Probably not if he's white.

Also, a lot of Irish Americans supported and even funded and provided arms to the IRA, a terrorist organization. They weren't deported either. Why? Cause they are white people.

You are comparing citizen rights to immigrant rights, which is not at all the same for good reason. And you are wrong. Sinn Fein leaders have been denied visas to the US due to their IRA ties, and denied green cards. It is our policy not to harbor violent extremists of any cause, and it’s a good one.
https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/sinn-feins-ohare-denied-visa-for-trip-to-capitol-hill/26208677.html

Green card immigrants for have rights and protection.
Uh oh, Trump goofed and now needs you apologists to smoke-and-mirrors for him

Well, Trump constantly goofs so no shock there.

However, there's a good chance that Khalil is legally deportable under US law. Will be very interesting to see how the courts handle this.

[Anonymous]

Again, whether he gets released or not in a year he is going because he has no right to his green card being renewed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What does it mean to "support Hamas?"
Pledging allegience to Hamas would certainly count.
Transferring money to "Hamas Inc." via wire transfer would count.
Saying "I think Hamas' actions are justified" seems like a grey area.

Saying I want a cease fire and think Israel is committing genocide doesn't necessarily equate to "supporting Hamas." Did Hamas even want a cease-fire? Certainly on their terms, but that applies to any belligerent. For all we know he might hate Hamas and prefer the PLO or some other organization.

What evidence is there that the student "supported Hamas?" Merely asking for a ceasefire or asking Columbia to divest, would not seem to qualify as "supporting terrorism."

How 'bout this (which I posted earlier)?

Khalil acted as a negotiator and sometimes spokesperson for CUAD (Columbia University Apartheid Divest).

CUAD explicitly and officially issued a statement supporting Hamas and 10/7. As quoted in the Times:

“We support liberation by any means necessary, including armed resistance,” the group, Columbia University Apartheid Divest, said in its statement revoking the apology.

The group marked the anniversary of the Oct. 7 attack on Israel by distributing a newspaper with a headline that used Hamas’s name for it: “One Year Since Al-Aqsa Flood, Revolution Until Victory,” it read, over a picture of Hamas fighters breaching the security fence to Israel. And the group posted an essay calling the attack a “moral, military and political victory” and quoting Ismail Haniyeh, the assassinated former political leader of Hamas.

“The Palestinian resistance is moving their struggle to a new phase of escalation and it is our duty to meet them there,” the group wrote on Oct. 7 on Telegram. “It is our duty to fight for our freedom!”

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/09/nyregion/c...ian-group-hamas.html

None of the quotes actually say that they support Hamas. Like the PP mentioned above, I guess it depends on what is viewed as support.

Well, the actual language of the statute says "endorse". Seems to me that the quotes clearly "endorse" Hamas. Your opinion?

Google is telling me that endorse is kind of a step up from support in that endorse means the support is more explicit and official.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How about supporters of violent settlers in the West Bank? Should we deport them?

If their behavior, not just their words, rises to the necessary legal threshold, sure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What does it mean to "support Hamas?"
Pledging allegience to Hamas would certainly count.
Transferring money to "Hamas Inc." via wire transfer would count.
Saying "I think Hamas' actions are justified" seems like a grey area.

Saying I want a cease fire and think Israel is committing genocide doesn't necessarily equate to "supporting Hamas." Did Hamas even want a cease-fire? Certainly on their terms, but that applies to any belligerent. For all we know he might hate Hamas and prefer the PLO or some other organization.

What evidence is there that the student "supported Hamas?" Merely asking for a ceasefire or asking Columbia to divest, would not seem to qualify as "supporting terrorism."

How 'bout this (which I posted earlier)?

Khalil acted as a negotiator and sometimes spokesperson for CUAD (Columbia University Apartheid Divest).

CUAD explicitly and officially issued a statement supporting Hamas and 10/7. As quoted in the Times:

“We support liberation by any means necessary, including armed resistance,” the group, Columbia University Apartheid Divest, said in its statement revoking the apology.

The group marked the anniversary of the Oct. 7 attack on Israel by distributing a newspaper with a headline that used Hamas’s name for it: “One Year Since Al-Aqsa Flood, Revolution Until Victory,” it read, over a picture of Hamas fighters breaching the security fence to Israel. And the group posted an essay calling the attack a “moral, military and political victory” and quoting Ismail Haniyeh, the assassinated former political leader of Hamas.

“The Palestinian resistance is moving their struggle to a new phase of escalation and it is our duty to meet them there,” the group wrote on Oct. 7 on Telegram. “It is our duty to fight for our freedom!”

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/09/nyregion/c...ian-group-hamas.html

Exactly. This guy wasn’t just walking around with a cardboard sign reading “Cease Fire.”

So, if a South African living in the US with a green card during the 80s supported Nelson Mandela and the ANC, should he have been deported back to South Africa? Mandela and the ANC were considered terrorists until 2008.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/us-government-considered-nelson-mandela-terrorist-until-2008-flna2d11708787

DP. Let's make the hypothetical match the current situation:

How 'bout if our imaginary South African issued a statement supporting murdering white South African civilians en masse and calling for the destruction of western civilization (as CUAD has done)?

Deportable?

So make up some sh#t and deport them? Why do Jewish people get to decide who is arrested and deported and who stays in the US? Why does every Ivy League president have to be a pro Israeli extremists?

This has gone too far. It is time for the US to cut all ties with Israel. Any pro Israeli should be deported to Israel. These people will be at home in the apartheid society of religious extremist.

Sadly for you most Israeli supporters are US citizens. Unlike this guy.

Israel is an enemy of the US. Any supporter or people who claim Israel is their homeland must be deported. Trump is building the infrastructure to deport 12 million immigrants and the legal foundation to remove birth right citizenship. We can use this system to remove the true threat to America. This needs to take priority over illegals. Luckily there is no due process. That would slow things down.

Apparently you're the only one who got the memo about that. The U.S. government, which decides such things instead of Palestinian lobbyists and propagandists, seems to believe Israel is an ally. That's the case because most elected U.S. officials believe that, because their constituents tell them so. The tiny, albeit vocal, minority who would like to structure U.S. foreign relations otherwise have been overwhelmingly outvoted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What does it mean to "support Hamas?"
Pledging allegience to Hamas would certainly count.
Transferring money to "Hamas Inc." via wire transfer would count.
Saying "I think Hamas' actions are justified" seems like a grey area.

Saying I want a cease fire and think Israel is committing genocide doesn't necessarily equate to "supporting Hamas." Did Hamas even want a cease-fire? Certainly on their terms, but that applies to any belligerent. For all we know he might hate Hamas and prefer the PLO or some other organization.

What evidence is there that the student "supported Hamas?" Merely asking for a ceasefire or asking Columbia to divest, would not seem to qualify as "supporting terrorism."

How 'bout this (which I posted earlier)?

Khalil acted as a negotiator and sometimes spokesperson for CUAD (Columbia University Apartheid Divest).

CUAD explicitly and officially issued a statement supporting Hamas and 10/7. As quoted in the Times:

“We support liberation by any means necessary, including armed resistance,” the group, Columbia University Apartheid Divest, said in its statement revoking the apology.

The group marked the anniversary of the Oct. 7 attack on Israel by distributing a newspaper with a headline that used Hamas’s name for it: “One Year Since Al-Aqsa Flood, Revolution Until Victory,” it read, over a picture of Hamas fighters breaching the security fence to Israel. And the group posted an essay calling the attack a “moral, military and political victory” and quoting Ismail Haniyeh, the assassinated former political leader of Hamas.

“The Palestinian resistance is moving their struggle to a new phase of escalation and it is our duty to meet them there,” the group wrote on Oct. 7 on Telegram. “It is our duty to fight for our freedom!”

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/09/nyregion/c...ian-group-hamas.html

Exactly. This guy wasn’t just walking around with a cardboard sign reading “Cease Fire.”

So, if a South African living in the US with a green card during the 80s supported Nelson Mandela and the ANC, should he have been deported back to South Africa? Mandela and the ANC were considered terrorists until 2008.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/us-government-considered-nelson-mandela-terrorist-until-2008-flna2d11708787

DP. Let's make the hypothetical match the current situation:

How 'bout if our imaginary South African issued a statement supporting murdering white South African civilians en masse and calling for the destruction of western civilization (as CUAD has done)?

Deportable?

So make up some sh#t and deport them? Why do Jewish people get to decide who is arrested and deported and who stays in the US? Why does every Ivy League president have to be a pro Israeli extremists?

This has gone too far. It is time for the US to cut all ties with Israel. Any pro Israeli should be deported to Israel. These people will be at home in the apartheid society of religious extremist.

Sadly for you most Israeli supporters are US citizens. Unlike this guy.

Israel is an enemy of the US. Any supporter or people who claim Israel is their homeland must be deported. Trump is building the infrastructure to deport 12 million immigrants and the legal foundation to remove birth right citizenship. We can use this system to remove the true threat to America. This needs to take priority over illegals. Luckily there is no due process. That would slow things down.

A lot of unrelated and yet totally incoherent thoughts here. Better keep Taking your English As A Seconf Language classes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What does it mean to "support Hamas?"
Pledging allegience to Hamas would certainly count.
Transferring money to "Hamas Inc." via wire transfer would count.
Saying "I think Hamas' actions are justified" seems like a grey area.

Saying I want a cease fire and think Israel is committing genocide doesn't necessarily equate to "supporting Hamas." Did Hamas even want a cease-fire? Certainly on their terms, but that applies to any belligerent. For all we know he might hate Hamas and prefer the PLO or some other organization.

What evidence is there that the student "supported Hamas?" Merely asking for a ceasefire or asking Columbia to divest, would not seem to qualify as "supporting terrorism."

How 'bout this (which I posted earlier)?

Khalil acted as a negotiator and sometimes spokesperson for CUAD (Columbia University Apartheid Divest).

CUAD explicitly and officially issued a statement supporting Hamas and 10/7. As quoted in the Times:

“We support liberation by any means necessary, including armed resistance,” the group, Columbia University Apartheid Divest, said in its statement revoking the apology.

The group marked the anniversary of the Oct. 7 attack on Israel by distributing a newspaper with a headline that used Hamas’s name for it: “One Year Since Al-Aqsa Flood, Revolution Until Victory,” it read, over a picture of Hamas fighters breaching the security fence to Israel. And the group posted an essay calling the attack a “moral, military and political victory” and quoting Ismail Haniyeh, the assassinated former political leader of Hamas.

“The Palestinian resistance is moving their struggle to a new phase of escalation and it is our duty to meet them there,” the group wrote on Oct. 7 on Telegram. “It is our duty to fight for our freedom!”

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/09/nyregion/c...ian-group-hamas.html

Exactly. This guy wasn’t just walking around with a cardboard sign reading “Cease Fire.”

So, if a South African living in the US with a green card during the 80s supported Nelson Mandela and the ANC, should he have been deported back to South Africa? Mandela and the ANC were considered terrorists until 2008.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/us-government-considered-nelson-mandela-terrorist-until-2008-flna2d11708787

DP. Let's make the hypothetical match the current situation:

How 'bout if our imaginary South African issued a statement supporting murdering white South African civilians en masse and calling for the destruction of western civilization (as CUAD has done)?

Deportable?

Probably not if he's white.

Also, a lot of Irish Americans supported and even funded and provided arms to the IRA, a terrorist organization. They weren't deported either. Why? Cause they are white people.

You are comparing citizen rights to immigrant rights, which is not at all the same for good reason. And you are wrong. Sinn Fein leaders have been denied visas to the US due to their IRA ties, and denied green cards. It is our policy not to harbor violent extremists of any cause, and it’s a good one.
https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/sinn-feins-ohare-denied-visa-for-trip-to-capitol-hill/26208677.html

Green card immigrants for have rights and protection.
Uh oh, Trump goofed and now needs you apologists to smoke-and-mirrors for him

Can you try that again, in English this time? We don't speak transliterated Arabic here.