Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just can’t get over all the people who would not use the word “kidnapped” to refer to the baby hostages that were later executed by ordinary non-Hamas Palestinians by being strangled to death, but now want me to apparently refer to the arrest of a foreign national that supported the murders of those babies as a “kidnapping.”

You’re not going to find much support for your pearl clutching over two babies when TENS OF THOUSANDS OF BABIES have been extra-judiciously killed by Israel - often in more horrific circumstances - just in the past two + years. Does that fact also shock you?

Never mind that you’re apparently just making shit up with zero - and I mean literally zero - evidence that “ordinary non-Hamas” Palestinians had anything to do with the fate of those two lives. If you intend to submit Israeli statements to support that argument, just know that you would be trying to enter evidence into the record that is sourced from the same trustworthy chaps who brought us 40 beheaded babies and right about 77 years now of unrelenting, self-serving false statements.

That said, kidnapping is reprehensible across the board and of course it’s awful and sad that those two children were killed. It’s just that there are a lot of dead bodies to sort out in this conflict and the relative impact just doesn’t really align with your disbelief. Sorry.

Except TENS OF THOUSANDS OF BABIES is also an unsubstantiated claim by the Hamas "Ministry of Health", not known for its veracity or ethics.
Same organization that allows terrorists to operate from hospitals full of patients (including sick children), making said hospitals military targets.

What number, then, would be sufficient for you to understand the gravity of the dead baby factor in this equation?

Are you refuting at least 20,000 dead Palestinian children (even though the HHSA equivalent in Israel and the IDF have separately validated the figures provided by the Gaza health ministry, or whatever it’s known as)?

10,000 dead children?

5,000 dead children?

2,500 dead children?

1,000 dead children?

750?

500?

250?

100?

50?

25?

Are you here to claim that no Palestinian children have actually been killed?

Anonymous wrote:I think the law allowing greencard holders to be deported for "expressing" certain views is too vague and inconsistent with our 1st amendment traditions. If I'm a green card holder at a party and I say I think Palestininians are justified to resort to violence I can be deported? What about the new movie showing Palestinian displacement, can I be deported for watching that because someone thinks the film "supports terrorists?"

I might be in favor of repealing the law or having it declared unconstitutional.

But even if the law is left of the books some nuance (unlikely when debating people on the internet or from this administration) is in order.

Is Mahmoud Khalil really a threat to US security or foreign policy interests? If he were a student at an Israeli university or if he were praising Al-Quaeda on September 12 2001, I could kind of see the point of deporting him. But it doesn't sound like he's real threat now in the US. Has he been in contact with Hamas agents or trained people to fight for Hamas? Is he stockpiling weapons or training people to engage in subversive acts?

He's also a(was) student and students do this kind of stuff. It's on Columbia to enforce their rules about trespassing, etc. If he was engaged in discriminatory acts against Jews, convict him of that and then there's a legit reason to deport him.

Anonymous wrote:He'll be just fine back in Syria, where his hate speech will surely garner him the acclaim and adulation he seeks. He just chose the wrong venue from which to spew his venom.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just can’t get over all the people who would not use the word “kidnapped” to refer to the baby hostages that were later executed by ordinary non-Hamas Palestinians by being strangled to death, but now want me to apparently refer to the arrest of a foreign national that supported the murders of those babies as a “kidnapping.”

You’re not going to find much support for your pearl clutching over two babies when TENS OF THOUSANDS OF BABIES have been extra-judiciously killed by Israel - often in more horrific circumstances - just in the past two + years. Does that fact also shock you?

Never mind that you’re apparently just making shit up with zero - and I mean literally zero - evidence that “ordinary non-Hamas” Palestinians had anything to do with the fate of those two lives. If you intend to submit Israeli statements to support that argument, just know that you would be trying to enter evidence into the record that is sourced from the same trustworthy chaps who brought us 40 beheaded babies and right about 77 years now of unrelenting, self-serving false statements.

That said, kidnapping is reprehensible across the board and of course it’s awful and sad that those two children were killed. It’s just that there are a lot of dead bodies to sort out in this conflict and the relative impact just doesn’t really align with your disbelief. Sorry.

Except TENS OF THOUSANDS OF BABIES is also an unsubstantiated claim by the Hamas "Ministry of Health", not known for its veracity or ethics.
Same organization that allows terrorists to operate from hospitals full of patients (including sick children), making said hospitals military targets.

Anonymous wrote:It’s also interesting to me that his wife is unnamed. Why?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just can’t get over all the people who would not use the word “kidnapped” to refer to the baby hostages that were later executed by ordinary non-Hamas Palestinians by being strangled to death, but now want me to apparently refer to the arrest of a foreign national that supported the murders of those babies as a “kidnapping.”

You’re not going to find much support for your pearl clutching over two babies when TENS OF THOUSANDS OF BABIES have been extra-judiciously killed by Israel - often in more horrific circumstances - just in the past two + years. Does that fact also shock you?

Never mind that you’re apparently just making shit up with zero - and I mean literally zero - evidence that “ordinary non-Hamas” Palestinians had anything to do with the fate of those two lives. If you intend to submit Israeli statements to support that argument, just know that you would be trying to enter evidence into the record that is sourced from the same trustworthy chaps who brought us 40 beheaded babies and right about 77 years now of unrelenting, self-serving false statements.

That said, kidnapping is reprehensible across the board and of course it’s awful and sad that those two children were killed. It’s just that there are a lot of dead bodies to sort out in this conflict and the relative impact just doesn’t really align with your disbelief. Sorry.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:whatever-

the point here isnt whether this is good speech- the nazis in skokie werent advoicating anything decent either, it was horrific- they marched in skokie b/c they wanted to show nazi insignia and brown shirts to holocaust survivors. they wanted them to feel like teh terror would continue and the first amendment protected that despite the psycholigical impact in the victims. The question at issue is whether the first amendment applies to green card holders. An american citizen can stand on a street corner and shout horrible things all day long, in cities they can shout 24/7, if they arent literally egging a crowd on to lybch somone or throw a grenade right that second, it is protected speech no matter how distasteful or harmful, the 1st amendment protects harmful speech- it stops short of speech that causes immediate physical violence. but is it applicable to non-citizens??

I just don’t believe that, unfortunately. We know exactly what the response of all the people in this thread moaning about this would have been if Khalil had been a woman going to rallies saying “transgender women are men.”

Let’s say that Riley Gaines had been a student athlete recruited from abroad, for instance, and stood up to talk about her experiences racing against Lia Thomas. Exactly zero of the passionate defenders of Khalil here or elsewhere would have said a single thing to defend Gaines-the-immigrant. No, they would have been bending over backwards to defend her arrest and deportation. The Congressional Democrats would certainly not have been putting out tweets saying “Free Gaines.”

I just don’t buy the argument that this is purely a free speech issue, and that Khalil’s supporters are good, patriotic Americans only concerned about free speech, because the minute you substitute in a hypothetical with different speech, the example falls apart.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who paid for his education at Columbia?

Likely his middle eastern family that owns oil, who else would sponsor him?!

Oh yeah, Palestinians are swimming in oil, there’s just so much of it

Do you not realize that most Palestinians are poor because they live under a brutal military occupation?

Wasn’t this guy born in Syria? Where was he living before moving to NY for grad school? Gaza?

Anonymous wrote:I just can’t get over all the people who would not use the word “kidnapped” to refer to the baby hostages that were later executed by ordinary non-Hamas Palestinians by being strangled to death, but now want me to apparently refer to the arrest of a foreign national that supported the murders of those babies as a “kidnapping.”