Columbia University is colluding with the far-right in its attack on students

[Derec]

So you favor deportation of those legally here who hold opinions disapproved by the gov’t. Better hope this travesty is not upheld by the courts because gov’ts and approved views change.

When it comes to extremist views such as Nazism or Islamism, yes. And hopefully we never get a government that holds opposite views on these extremist ideologies, or we are far more fucked than we are with Trump being in office.

 

[Derec]

In simpler terms, smear by association.

He isn't just a rank and file Mitläufer. He is one of the higher ups in the CUAD organization.

 

[laughing dog]

So you favor deportation of those legally here who hold opinions disapproved by the gov’t. Better hope this travesty is not upheld by the courts because gov’ts and approved views change.

When it comes to extremist views such as Nazism or Islamism, yes. And hopefully we never get a government that holds opposite views on these extremist ideologies, or we are far more fucked than we are with Trump being in office.

Nah. But as I pointed out, if this legal, people like you could be deported in the future.

 

[laughing dog]

In simpler terms, smear by association.

He isn't just a rank and file Mitläufer. He is one of the higher ups in the CUAD organization.

Bravo, doubling down on smear by association. Bra

 

[Derec]

Nah. But as I pointed out, if this legal, people like you could be deported in the future.

That's pretty much the definition of slippery slope fallacy. Nazis should not be barred from immigrating because then anybody could be.

Besides, I am a citizen.

 

[Derec]

Bra

???

That was pretty random, even for you.

 

[laughing dog]

Nah. But as I pointed out, if this legal, people like you could be deported in the future.

That's pretty much the definition of slippery slope fallacy. Nazis should not be barred from immigrating because then anybody could be.

Besides, I am a citizen.

You think citizenship can’t be rescinded.

 

[laughing dog]

Bra

???

That was pretty random, even for you.

Taking part of response to in attempt to fling an insult is pretty desperate. Bravo, bra (a version of bro).

 

[Derec]

You think citizenship can’t be rescinded.

It can, under certain circumstances, like for immigration fraud.
Rasmea Odeh: How an unrepentant Palestinian terrorist became a political hero of the anti-Zionist left
Of course, this terrorist should never have been allowed in in the first place. Clinton administration should have vetted her upon entry.

 

[laughing dog]

You think citizenship can’t be rescinded.

It can, under certain circumstances, like for immigration fraud.

It’s cute you think dictators will be constrained by laws.

Just remember, the deportation you applaud today maybe yours in the future.

 

[Arctish]

If it's not a criminal matter, what justified the arrest?

People may be detained for immigration issues, or is that wrong?

Putting the cart in front of the horse is wrong.

You have to have an immigration issue in order to justify detaining someone due to an immigration issue. First the issue, then the response, not the other way around.

Anyone with permanent resident status has already been granted the right to live and work in the United States indefinitely, so it can't be an immigration issue.

It is when the Green Card is rescinded.

In order to rescind a green card you have to have legal proceedings in Federal Court before a judge who has been appointed to hear such cases and make such rulings, and in order to have legal proceedings you have to file the proper paperwork and provide justification for them.

First the issue, then the response.

Arresting him without charge and hustling him off to a prison far from the reach of the District Court that will hear his case (assuming he gets a hearing)

How many people active in this thread are lawyers? I am not saying the Trump administration dotted all ts and crossed all is here. We all know they tend to be fuckups when it comes to actual implementation of their ideas.

If you suspect the Trump Administration is not acting in accordance with the law, then your hand waving away the legal ramifications is even worse.

We are talking about Constitutional Rights here. We are talking about political persecution, unlawful detention, and Trump-ed up charges. This is what dictatorships do. This is what totalitarianism looks like.

"First they came for the anti-war pro-Palestine statehood protesters, and I said nothing - because I was a Zionist and fuck those guys..."

But I refuse to see Mahmoud Khalil as anything but a degenerate Islamist Hamas supporter, and we do not need to accept his Ilk into this country as immigrants.

Your refusal to see him as anything other than your own personal Boogeyman is your business. He has already immigrated, he already has protections under the Fourth Amendment from arrest without a warrant, and how you feel about him living in the United States is irrelevant.

All that said, the courts will decide, as well they should. Do you agree?

The courts will not decide on things for which there is no evidence and on which no lawyer has presented a case.

is Chilean Junta-style shit, and you're okay with it?

It's certainly not "Chilean Junta-style shit". We know where Khalil is being held. He has access to lawyers and to courts.
And it can't be proper "Chilean Junta-style shit" without free helicopter tours.

There is a big difference between being opposed to what's happening in Gaza and being a supporter of Hamas, but do go on.

Indeed. There is a big difference.
But Khalil and the other CUADers are firmly in the latter camp.
Deporting Hamas Supporters Like Mahmoud Khalil Is Perfectly Legal

The Syrian-born green-card recipient served as one of the ringleaders of the post-October 7 riots at his former university and functioned as the lead “negotiator” for the student group known as Columbia United Apartheid Divest (CUAD). CUAD was one of the primary agents of chaos on Columbia’s campus during last spring’s “encampment,” during which rioters smashed windows, defaced and occupied buildings, disrupted classes, and harassed and threatened Jewish students. Interestingly, recent court filings show that Khalil received his green cards just five months ago—long after he and CUAD wreaked havoc (and just eleven days after President Trump’s electoral win).
[...]
The Department of Homeland Security alleges that Khalil, in similar fashion, distributed pro-Hamas flyers on Columbia University’s campus bearing the Hamas insignia, materials purportedly originating from Hamas’s own media arm.

Your own link says the activities it cites are "alleged" and provides no evidence of charges being filed. And which ones do you think were illegal? Distributing fliers? Acting as a negotiator?

Show us the evidence of Mr. Khalil's wrongdoing. Because right now, it looks like you don't like his opinions and that's reason enough for you to applaud his arrest without charge and possible deportation without due process.

The wrongdoing would be his activities on behalf of CUAD. Whether that turns out to be deportable, is for courts to decide. Certainly, opinions differ. Erielle Azerrad, the author of the City Journal article thinks he is eligible for deportation. She is a lawyer with a JD from Georgetown.

And since I think the courts should decide, I am certainly not against "due process".

You don't appear to be in favor of it, either.

If you were, you'd take issue with the lack of a warrant.

 

[ZiprHead]

Deporting Hamas Supporters Like Mahmoud Khalil Is Perfectly Legal

The Syrian-born green-card recipient served as one of the ringleaders of the post-October 7 riots at his former university and functioned as the lead “negotiator” for the student group known as Columbia United Apartheid Divest (CUAD). CUAD was one of the primary agents of chaos on Columbia’s campus during last spring’s “encampment,” during which rioters smashed windows, defaced and occupied buildings, disrupted classes, and harassed and threatened Jewish students. Interestingly, recent court filings show that Khalil received his green cards just five months ago—long after he and CUAD wreaked havoc (and just eleven days after President Trump’s electoral win).
[...]
The Department of Homeland Security alleges that Khalil, in similar fashion, distributed pro-Hamas flyers on Columbia University’s campus bearing the Hamas insignia, materials purportedly originating from Hamas’s own media arm.

Nothing in your quote shows what was done is legal.

And City Journal is a very right wing rag.

 

[ZiprHead]

The First Amendment makes no mention of immigrants or immigration policy.

That is actually correct. It says "people" not citizens only*.

*Except for the right to address the government with their concerns.

That they made an exemption between citizens and people is quite interesting, don't you think?

 

[Derec]

It’s cute you think dictators will be constrained by laws.

If we are really headed toward a dictatorship, then none of this matters anyway.

Just remember, the deportation you applaud today maybe yours in the future.

In the case of Khalil we have a resident, not a citizen, who was a negotiator for a group which engaged in vandalism of Columbia University property. And it did so in order to coerce Columbia University to change their policies.
I do not see how Khalil's case would have any application to deporting citizens just for expressing opinions.

 

[Derec]

Putting the cart in front of the horse is wrong.
You have to have an immigration issue in order to justify detaining someone due to an immigration issue. First the issue, then the response, not the other way around.

Arctish, are you a lawyer?
I am not.

In order to rescind a green card you have to have legal proceedings in Federal Court before a judge who has been appointed to hear such cases and make such rulings, and in order to have legal proceedings you have to file the proper paperwork and provide justification for them.

And that can be argued before a court.

If you suspect the Trump Administration is not acting in accordance with the law, then your hand waving away the legal ramifications is even worse.

I do not know one way or the other. Legal commentators have been divided on this issue.

Your refusal to see him as anything other than your own personal Boogeyman is your business. He has already immigrated, he already has protections under the Fourth Amendment from arrest without a warrant, and how you feel about him living in the United States is irrelevant.

Do you think you and others on this forum defending Khalil would be supportive of him if he was a white Neonazi from Germany?
I don't think so. You like Khalil because of the Islamophilia that is endemic on the Left.

Your own link says the activities it cites are "alleged" and provides no evidence of charges being filed. And which ones do you think were illegal? Distributing fliers? Acting as a negotiator?

Immigration is an administrative matter, so there are no charges involved.
I think coercing Columbia University by threatening campus building occupation and vandalism is illegal. And Khalil was acting on behalf of the organization that did that.
Not that Alvin Bragg is very interested in enforcing the laws.

If you were, you'd take issue with the lack of a warrant.

Again, not a lawyer. I do not know how the issue of warrants work for immigration detentions. Do you?

 

[ZiprHead]

In the case of Khalil we have a resident,

The First Amendment says "all people", not just citizens.

 

[Arctish]

DHS official utterly fails in his attempts to explain and defend Khalil's arrest

Not only does he dishonestly insist on talking about visas even though he knows permanent residents like Khalil are not visa holders, he accuses Khalil of criminal conduct without being able to point to one single thing the guy did that was in violation of any laws.

This whole thing reeks of suppression and punishment for political speech.

 

[crazyfingers]

DHS official utterly fails in his attempts to explain and defend Khalil's arrest

Not only does he dishonestly insist on talking about visas even though he knows permanent residents like Khalil are not visa holders, he accuses Khalil of criminal conduct without being able to point to one single thing the guy did that was in violation of any laws.

This whole thing reeks of suppression and punishment for political speech.

That was pretty pathetic. No judge would accept that "argument".

 

[Derec]

Nothing in your quote shows what was done is legal.

The quotes were specifically about the issues of Khalil being pro-Hamas and that CUAD engaged in far more than mere speech.

And City Journal is a very right wing rag.

Only left wing rags are acceptable?

 

[Derec]

Some of Khalil's rafiqs have gotten into some trouble themselves:

Columbia students who occupied Hamilton Hall in pro-Palestinian protest expelled, suspended

They should be prosecuted as well, but neither Alvin Bragg nor his ADA chipmunks are very likely to do their jobs here.