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

[Derec]

An article about CUAD, Mahmoud Khalil's organization, from last October.

Pro-Palestinian Group at Columbia Now Backs ‘Armed Resistance’ by Hamas

The pro-Palestinian group that sparked the student encampment movement at Columbia University in response to the Israel-Hamas war is becoming more hard-line in its rhetoric, openly supporting militant groups fighting Israel and rescinding an apology it made after one of its members said the school was lucky he wasn’t out killing Zionists.
“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.

By supporting Khalil, this is what you are supporting.

 

[Arctish]

An article about CUAD, Mahmoud Khalil's organization, from last October.

Pro-Palestinian Group at Columbia Now Backs ‘Armed Resistance’ by Hamas

The pro-Palestinian group that sparked the student encampment movement at Columbia University in response to the Israel-Hamas war is becoming more hard-line in its rhetoric, openly supporting militant groups fighting Israel and rescinding an apology it made after one of its members said the school was lucky he wasn’t out killing Zionists.
“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.

By supporting Khalil, this is what you are supporting.

What a load of horseshit. People are responsible for their own actions. They are only responsible for the actions of others to the extent and degree that they influence and/or control those others.

If there is evidence Mr. Khalil directed the actions of the members of CUAD who committed criminal acts, or that he had the power to prevent or mitigate the extent of those acts and failed to do so, then post it. If there is evidence he committed crimes himself, post that, too. Right now it looks like all you have is a wish that someone, somewhere can gin up a reason to revoke Mr. Khalil's permanent resident status because he disagrees with you about the best way to end the war in Palestine and you want to punish and silence him.

I support upholding the Constitution of the United States of America. I support due process. I support holding people accountable for their actions.

What are you supporting?

 

[Derec]

More of these "not at all pro-terrorism" Gaza protesters.

 

[Arctish]

I'll see your Nioh Berg and raise you a Dorothy Thompson.

Thompson first encountered the Nazi movement in the early 1920s when she was a Berlin-based correspondent for Philadelphia's Public Ledger. Hitler made headlines in 1923 for his failed coup attempt in Munich, known as the Beer Hall Putsch. Thompson immediately sought to interview Hitler about the growing Nazi party.

"No one was taking them all that seriously in terms of their taking power," Peter Kurth, author of American Cassandra: The Life of Dorothy Thompson, told Radio Diaries. "But she kept her eye on them."

In addition to mocking Hitler's demeanor, Thompson sounded the alarm on the Nazi party's discriminatory policies. She highlighted his penchant for "the old racial prejudice" and wrote that "'down with the Jews!' was one of the first planks in his program."

"You know, there's that expression: 'Man's greatest fear is to be laughed at by a woman,'" says Karine Walther, associate professor of history at Georgetown University in Qatar and author of "Dorothy Thompson and American Zionism." "This is a man who is so concerned with power and his image. She is able to say things about him that are humiliating. And I think this is why she gets kicked out of the country."

..."Dorothy was at her hotel in Berlin, and the Gestapo knocked on the hotel door and handed her papers saying she had 24 hours to leave the country," Kurth says.

There are some interesting similarities there, especially the Head of State disliking contrary opinions so much he sent the State Police to kick a critic out of the country.

But wait, there's more!

Thompson used her position on the airwaves to call attention to the Jewish refugee crisis. She even authored the book Refugees: Anarchy or Organization? in 1938, in which she called on the isolationist United States to accept Jewish refugees.

"She really understood what Hitler wanted to do, his attack against Jews as a race," says Walther. "That's one of the things that makes her so wonderful at this time, because there were clearly so many Americans who were fine with it."

Obviously a liberal.

Thompson's antifascist activism wasn't limited to the media. In 1939, she made headlines for protesting a rally of the German American Bund — an organization of American Nazis — at Madison Square Garden. Thompson heckled and jeered during speeches and ultimately had to be escorted out by police.

And an activist.

More than that, she was a Zionist hailed by the leader of the World Zionist movement. That is, she was hailed until she held to her moral principles and refused to employ double standards or accept special pleading:

Walther says that Thompson visited Palestine in the summer of 1945, days before Germany's surrender from World War II.

"Dorothy went to Palestine and saw refugees of the Palestinian population being forced off their own land," says Kurth. "She saw a people uprooted."

Walther adds that it reminded Thompson of "the kind of hatred and violence that she'd seen in Germany."
Thompson returned to the United States and began to ask questions about the Zionist movement.

"The situation there is not the way it has been presented by many of the Zionists," Thompson wrote in a 1946 letter to Ted Thackrey, editor at the New York Post.

In 1947, the Post promptly dropped her column. In the aftermath, Thompson wrote of being targeted by "radical Zionists."

"She faces really immediate pushback from American Zionist organizations, as well as newspaper editors, and they accused her of antisemitism," says Walther.

Sound familiar?

"There is a great quote, which she makes at the end of her life," says Walther. "She says, 'I had to speak out about this' — meaning attacks on Palestinian civilians — 'for the same reason I had to speak out about Hitler. But my Zionist friends do not seem to understand the universality of simple moral principles.'"

 

[Bomb#20]

And City Journal is a very right wing rag.

Only left wing rags are acceptable?

 

[laughing dog]

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.

Of course you don’t because you don’t approve of his ideology. But the principle is the same in his case and in your hypothetical situation that I hope never arises.

 

[Derec]

Of course you don’t because you don’t approve of his ideology. But the principle is the same in his case and in your hypothetical situation that I hope never arises.

No, it is not, for the reasons I already explained. There is a difference between citizens and residents, and what Khalil did was not just speech.

 

[Derec]

I'll see your Nioh Berg and raise you a Dorothy Thompson.

 

[Derec]

What a load of horseshit. People are responsible for their own actions. They are only responsible for the actions of others to the extent and degree that they influence and/or control those others.

So how is Khalil not responsible for his actions as "negotiator" for a group that uses vandalism in order to coerce Columbia University to divest from Israel?

If there is evidence Mr. Khalil directed the actions of the members of CUAD who committed criminal acts, or that he had the power to prevent or mitigate the extent of those acts and failed to do so, then post it.

That is irrelevant I think. He might not have directed them to do so, but he still participated in their coercion scheme by acting as a "negotiator".

If there is evidence he committed crimes himself, post that, too.

Apparently crimes are not necessary for revocation of permanent residency.
In any case, while he may not have engaged in vandalism himself, I already posted links to NY coercion laws that I think fit what CUAD has done. And everybody engaged in the coercion scheme would be prosecutable as an accomplice, not just the ones engaging in vandalism but also the ones (like Khalil) that tried to get Columbia to acquiesce to CUAD's coercive demands.

Right now it looks like all you have is a wish that someone, somewhere can gin up a reason to revoke Mr. Khalil's permanent resident status because he disagrees with you about the best way to end the war in Palestine and you want to punish and silence him.

"Best way to end the war in Palestine"? He supports Hamas, a terrorist organization. He supports 10/7, the action that started this war.
It's like asking a Nazi in 1942 about the best way to end the war in Europe.

I support upholding the Constitution of the United States of America. I support due process. I support holding people accountable for their actions.

The law that gives SecState leeway in rescinding permanent residency has not been declared unconstitutional. And due process is being followed as the matter is being considered by courts.

What are you supporting?

Certainly not CUAD terror apologists.

 

[Arctish]

Of course you don’t because you don’t approve of his ideology. But the principle is the same in his case and in your hypothetical situation that I hope never arises.

No, it is not, for the reasons I already explained. There is a difference between citizens and residents, and what Khalil did was not just speech.

What you have done is not just speech, either. There is evidence posted on this forum indicating you've occasionally broken the law, whereas none has been presented that Khalil ever did.

He was arrested without warrant and is being held without charge. What makes you think you'd be immune from prosecution? The fact you're an ardent Zionist?

If you destroy Constitutional protections for others, you will no longer have them yourself.

 

[Arctish]

What a load of horseshit. People are responsible for their own actions. They are only responsible for the actions of others to the extent and degree that they influence and/or control those others.

So how is Khalil not responsible for his actions as "negotiator" for a group that uses vandalism in order to coerce Columbia University to divest from Israel?

He wasn't the leader. He wasn't the planner.

From the Washington Post:

Khalil, a graduate student at Columbia’s School of International and Public Affairs, emerged as an intermediary between student protesters and the school administration.

“Mahmoud has always been a calm, levelheaded person,” his wife, Noor Abdalla, told The Washington Post. “That’s why they choose him as a negotiator.”

Khalil spoke to the press on camera, unmasked — unlike most other protesters whose faces were obscured by masks or tightly wrapped kaffiyehs. He was careful about participating in the increasingly chaotic protests, his friends said, because he was in the country on a student visa at the time.

If there is evidence Mr. Khalil directed the actions of the members of CUAD who committed criminal acts, or that he had the power to prevent or mitigate the extent of those acts and failed to do so, then post it.

That is irrelevant I think. He might not have directed them to do so, but he still participated in their coercion scheme by acting as a "negotiator".

First you have to present evidence of a coercion scheme before you can accuse someone of participating in it, which is an essential step in justifying legal actions against them in response to it.

First the issue, then the response, not the other way around!

If there is evidence he committed crimes himself, post that, too.

Apparently crimes are not necessary for revocation of permanent residency.

Please list the conditions under which permanent residency can be revoked and cite the case law that spells it out.

I suspect you have not researched the claim you are making.

In any case, while he may not have engaged in vandalism himself, I already posted links to NY coercion laws that I think fit what CUAD has done. And everybody engaged in the coercion scheme would be prosecutable as an accomplice, not just the ones engaging in vandalism but also the ones (like Khalil) that tried to get Columbia to acquiesce to CUAD's coercive demands.

Right now it looks like all you have is a wish that someone, somewhere can gin up a reason to revoke Mr. Khalil's permanent resident status because he disagrees with you about the best way to end the war in Palestine and you want to punish and silence him.

"Best way to end the war in Palestine"? He supports Hamas, a terrorist organization. He supports 10/7, the action that started this war.
It's like asking a Nazi in 1942 about the best way to end the war in Europe.

I support upholding the Constitution of the United States of America. I support due process. I support holding people accountable for their actions.

The law that gives SecState leeway in rescinding permanent residency has not been declared unconstitutional. And due process is being followed as the matter is being considered by courts.

What are you supporting?

Certainly not CUAD terror apologists.

Please cite your sources that support the claim that Khalil himself supports Hamas.

I suspect you have not researched that claim, either.

 

[laughing dog]

Of course you don’t because you don’t approve of his ideology. But the principle is the same in his case and in your hypothetical situation that I hope never arises.

No, it is not, for the reasons I already explained. There is a difference between citizens and residents, and what Khalil did was not just speech.

As Ziprhead pointed out, there is no difference when there comes to free speech. Mr Khalil’s alleged role as a negotiator is a form of speech and it is an attempt at resolving a situation in a nonviolent manner.

You have no basis in fact for your suspicions as Arctish has shown.

Hell, the US govt had not made a cogent indictment against Mr Khalil.


You’ve got nothing but you antipathy towards his alleged views.

 

[ZiprHead]

Please list the conditions under which permanent residency can be revoked and cite the case law that spells it out.

This is the law the trump admin cites as their justification.

(C) Foreign policy​

(i) In general​

An alien whose presence or activities in the United States the Secretary of State has reasonable ground to believe would have potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States is deportable.

Frankly, I don't see how that cannot run afoul of the 1st amendment.

And,

It was only tested once during the Clinton administration where the judge tossed the case. He cited US foreign policy as too secretive and ever changing to make anyone guilty of committing this violation.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

View attachment 49704
Protest at Columbia today.

Why the masks outside. Either the masks are to avoid being identified or the picture is from years ago. So many people would not be wearing masks outside today for Covid.

1) A crowd like that, simply being outside isn't enough for safety.

2) If you are going in and out it's a lot easier to simply leave your mask on and not worry about it. Especially if you're wearing a proper respirator rather than any sort of ear-loop device.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

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

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

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.

My understanding is that you're an immigrant. Did you not pay attention to what the laws were about your green card?

AFIAK there are three ways to lose a green card:

1) The government establishes that there was fraud in your application. That's why things like that "stupid" communist party question--it's about providing an easy path to throwing such people out when it's discovered. This is resolved in court, not by decree.

2) You are convicted of (or plead guilty to) any offense that could carry a sentence of 1 year or greater.

3) You spend enough time outside the US that it appears that your residence is elsewhere and that is not being done because of your (or your spouse's) US employer. (A US employer can have you working in an overseas office without threatening your green card.)

All of these take time, all of these can be challenged in court. Only #3 even has any possibility of happening immediately (you come to the US after a long stint abroad, they can decide not to admit you.)

 

[Derec]

More "peaceful protesting" by the Palestine crowd.

Pro-Palestinian protesters cause $1M in damage to UW engineering building, equipment

SEATTLE — The University of Washington reported pro-Palestinian protesters caused more than $1 million in damage to the university’s Interdisciplinary Engineering Building during a violent demonstration Monday night.

The King County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office told KOMO News on Tuesday it was aware of 31 people who were arrested and booked into the King County jail in connection with the protest and occupation of the engineering building on the UW campus. The university said it was assessing the extent of the damage and working with law enforcement to address the situation.

I am sure there are some on here who will defend this shit.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

You do fucking get that some protestors can cause damage and some protestors don't cause damage. And that it is stupid to equatr the two together?

That people can both feel peaceful protesting is our right and condemn people that cause damage?

It isn't that damn hard to understand.

 

[laughing dog]

More "peaceful protesting" by the Palestine crowd.

Pro-Palestinian protesters cause $1M in damage to UW engineering building, equipment

SEATTLE — The University of Washington reported pro-Palestinian protesters caused more than $1 million in damage to the university’s Interdisciplinary Engineering Building during a violent demonstration Monday night.

The King County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office told KOMO News on Tuesday it was aware of 31 people who were arrested and booked into the King County jail in connection with the protest and occupation of the engineering building on the UW campus. The university said it was assessing the extent of the damage and working with law enforcement to address the situation.

I am sure there are some on here who will defend this shit.

That reflects more on your point of view than reality. Everyone ought to have the right to peaceful protest. I find it regretable that any damage occurred.

But it is true that there are posters here who defend all sorts of shite from angry governors killing puppies to the deportation of peaceful protesters to brutal police killings of unarmed alleged criminals to the unprovoked invasion of countries to the slaughter of civilians. That's what makes forums interesting - the diversity of opinion, no matter how uttterly despicable the opinions can be,