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?

Anonymous wrote:He is gone. It’s a matter of now or later. He held his green card for less for a year which means it is conditional and will not be renewed. We’ll see what Wednesday and his day in court brings.

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

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?

Anonymous wrote:He is gone. It’s a matter of now or later. He held his green card for less for a year which means it is conditional and will not be renewed. We’ll see what Wednesday and his day in court brings.

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?

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

Anonymous wrote:I’m still convinced they didn’t know he had a green card and thought they were dealing with a student visa. Now they are scrambling to come up with legal justification. Someone screwed up here and they just don’t want to admit it. I don’t actually think they wanted to pick this big fight right now.

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.”

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

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look at Form I-485. If he knowling lied on that form, he obtained his green card fraudulently.

And if didn’t? He clearly was arrested for his political views which is a violation of the First Amendment and should make everyone very nervous.

Today Trump tweeted it was illegal to boycott Tesla— are people who protest at Tesla dealers the next to be arrested?

Views or activities? If it's the latter, that is subject to review by immigration officials to obtain a green card.

It seems pretty clear that the organization he spoke for (CUAD) calls for violence in Palestine as a form of resistance, even the nyt reported that:
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/09/nyregion/columbia-pro-palestinian-group-hamas.html

Is that still covered free speech for a non-citizen? I’m not entirely sure…I think a good analogy would be IRA members in the US. Most Sinn Fein leaders were barred from travel to the US due to their history of IRA activity. I’m not sure we want to be a country that offers safe harbor to immigrants who want to use the US as a base from which to advocate to violence or wage war abroad. That is a big can of worms. And I do think Columbia University should have kicked out these students as soon as they began supporting violence.

I’m no fan of the trump admin and I think the retaliation against the law firms is a scary precedent. But I don’t see this action in quite the same light.

Look at the words the administration is using: "Led activities aligned to Hamas"

Which is so vague. PPs have mentioned how "aligned to Hamas" can really mean anything that Hamas also wants. Like a ceasefire. Like the end of occupation. Like the end of the siege of humanitarian goods/water/electricity.

If the admin had something specific that he himself has directly said, they would not use such vague words.

DP.

How 'bout we deal with this issues honestly and directly? Here's the situation:

1. Khalil is affiliated with an "coalition" (CUAD) that expressly and openly supports Hamas. He has acted as a "negotiator" during some of the coalition's protests.

2. However, there is no evidence that CUAD has supported Hamas with anything other than speech. (No evidence of material support has been presented).

3. There is also no evidence of direct statements by Khalil himself supporting Hamas.

4. US law allows deportation of aliens who endorse or espouse support for terrorist organizations. Hamas is a designated terrorist organization.

5. It's not clear whether the applicable laws are constitutional. SCOTUS jurisprudence on aliens' 1st Amendment rights is mixed.

Any disagreement with this analysis?